第1回
字幕なしで聞く
字幕なしで大意、テーマ、主要な情報をつかみます。
🎧 IELTSリスニングスピーキング練習
0:00 / 0:00
5回リスニング法
1本のリスニング教材を再利用できる英語インプットに変える
1回聞いて終わりにしないでください。同じエピソードを5回に分けて、まず大意、次に言語面の確認、シャドーイング、ディクテーション、最後に字幕なしで聞き直します。
第2回
英語字幕を見る
知らない語や難しい文を確認します。必要なら辞書や短いメモを使います。
第3回
シャドーイング
1文ずつ繰り返し、発音、リズム、強勢、イントネーションをまねします。
第4回
ディクテーション
聞こえた内容から重要な文をいくつか書き取り、形と構造を鍛えます。
第5回
字幕なしで再聴
文字の助けなしで再度聞き、以前より分かる部分が増えたことを確認します。
トレーニング後
共有して言い換える
メモ、新出語、役立つ概念を共有し、その後で自分の言葉でエピソードを言い換えましょう。
次のステップ
精聴から多聴へ
集中的に学習したエピソードを後で流し聞きに回し、慣れた素材で聞く量を増やしましょう。
第1回第2回第3回第4回第5回
📝 IELTSスピーキングダイアログトランスクリプト
Recently the city debated a proposal to restrict where street vendors could ply their trade. The idea was to move many sellers out of the main square and into side streets. Supporters said it would tidy the central area. Opponents argued it would be an affront to the neighbourhood's character and to long-established customs. I sat through a meeting where councillors discussed the plan for two hours. In the end the motion went through as a narrow 5-4 vote, and a three-month trial was announced. Some vendors adapted quickly. They simply moved to side streets and continued to ply their trade there. Others tried to attract customers by offering deals and to ply customers with free samples. Many locals felt this treatment was an affront, almost as if the council had dismissed decades of local practice. At the same time a few residents welcomed the change, saying it would reduce litter and noise. From what I could hear, the real issue is balance. Policies that aim to improve order should not unintentionally alienate people. If officials want compliance, they must consult those who ply informal businesses and avoid measures that feel like an affront to common sense.
📝 📚 IELTS練習問題
1
What did the city propose regarding street vendors?
不正解
正解:
A
説明:
The passage states there was a proposal to restrict where vendors could 'ply their trade'. B is wrong because the passage mentions restrictions, not a permanent ban. C is wrong because there is no mention of subsidised permanent stalls. D is wrong because the proposal was about restrictions, not legalisation without controls.
2
How did many locals react to the council's decision?
不正解
正解:
A
説明:
The speaker says opponents argued it would be 'an affront to the neighbourhood's character'. B is incorrect because the passage indicates opposition, not unanimous support. C is wrong; the text describes clear reactions, not indifference. D is incorrect; no street festivals in support are mentioned.
3
Where did some vendors relocate after the restrictions were announced?
不正解
正解:
A
説明:
The passage explicitly states vendors moved 'to side streets' and continued to ply their trade there. B is wrong because indoor markets are not mentioned. C is incorrect; suburbs are not referenced. D is wrong because the main square was where they were moved from, not to.
4
How long was the trial period announced by the council?
不正解
正解:
A
説明:
The passage states a 'three-month trial was announced'. B and C are wrong because those durations are not mentioned. D is a misleading detail: 'two hours' refers to how long the meeting lasted, not the trial period.
5
What can be inferred about the vendors who 'ply customers with free samples'?
不正解
正解:
A
説明:
The phrase 'ply customers with free samples' indicates vendors use samples to attract or keep customers. B is incorrect because offering samples is the opposite of refusing interaction. C is wrong; there is no mention of price increases. D is incorrect because offering samples suggests they continued trading.
6
Which inference about the effect of the policy on the city's image is best supported by the speaker?
不正解
正解:
A
説明:
The speaker says supporters claimed it would 'tidy the central area' while opponents said it was 'an affront' to character, implying tidiness may come at cost of authenticity. B is unsupported and exaggerated. C contradicts the text, which discusses likely effects. D is not mentioned or implied.
7
In the passage, what is the most appropriate meaning of the word 'affront'?
不正解
正解:
A
説明:
The context uses 'affront' to describe how opponents felt offended by the policy, so it means an insult or offence. B is wrong; 'affront' is not a legal restriction. C and D are incorrect because they are unrelated to the meaning implied in the passage.
リスニングをスピーキングに変換
LexiTalkアプリで即座のフィードバックと毎日の練習を取得。
アプリをダウンロード