Note: This essay is written to provide students with an example of writing debate words. I think, if a teacher is afraid to experience students' compositions in the examination room, there won't be any? Qi provides active and effective writing guidance for students. A teacher's writing is not necessarily better than that of students, but the value of a teacher lies in that he can provide students with an angle of introspection and reflection that they are not aware of. Therefore, the most effective writing teaching is to demonstrate in person, clear and clear. Whether it is successful or not, it should be valuable. )

? Thank you, Chairman. (used when meeting in the afternoon) Good afternoon.

? Another debater thinks that "in order to inherit and carry forward traditional culture, traditional Chinese character education should enter the classroom", but we think this is absolutely not feasible. There are three reasons.

? First, there is no legal basis. The Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) on National Common Language and Characters clearly stipulates that schools and other educational institutions teach Putonghua and standardize Chinese characters through Chinese language courses. The Chinese course used teaches Putonghua and standardized Chinese characters. The Chinese textbooks used shall conform to the norms and standards of the national common language. Please note that the wording of this clause focuses on the words "curriculum" and "teaching materials". As we know, the basic elements of school education content are curriculum, teaching materials and learners. Curriculum is the content of educational activities; Teaching materials are the basis of knowledge learning; On the other hand, learners are the objects of teaching activities. The three are closely related and indispensable. In short, the so-called education is a process in which learners acquire knowledge, improve their ability and self-cultivation through curriculum implementation with the help of teaching materials and driven by certain learning goals or tasks. Of course, we do not deny the role of traditional Chinese characters as learning materials or teaching cases to help students actively understand the traditional culture of the motherland. But what needs to be clear here is that there is a fundamental difference in concept between traditional Chinese character education and traditional Chinese character education. Traditional Chinese characters can be understood as a kind of knowledge content, which can be expressed as learning materials, means, tasks or ways; However, the significance of traditional Chinese character education is completely different. Once the use and mastery of traditional Chinese characters become the purpose of learning, does such education conform to the provisions of the above-mentioned laws on curriculum content and textbook norms? Especially in basic education, the content of knowledge taught in class should be clear and correct, and should not be disturbed by controversial content. More importantly, education is a public welfare undertaking that reflects the will of the state and must strictly abide by relevant national laws and regulations. As the saying goes, the law cannot be done without authorization. Schools should set an example of obeying laws and regulations. Therefore, we believe that there is no legal basis for traditional Chinese character education to enter the classroom.

? Second, it is inconsistent with history. Another important reason why other debaters insist on recognizing and inheriting traditional Chinese characters is that you think the study of traditional Chinese characters is an important aspect of inheriting and carrying forward traditional culture. Can we understand the subtext of this view: as a traditional carrier of information dissemination, traditional Chinese characters will inevitably reflect the core content of historical and cultural traditions, which is a certain fact. We certainly don't deny the fact that traditional Chinese characters have existed for a long time in history. But the crux of the problem is, does it always mean rationality in the present? In fact, even for the historical development of Chinese characters, their writing forms and communication channels are not static. Therefore, the view that traditional Chinese characters represent the overall consistent appearance of history and culture does not conform to the historical facts themselves. The truth is: from Oracle Bone Inscriptions, bronze inscriptions, to Da Zhuan and Xiao Zhuan, and then to Han Li, it has evolved into running script and regular script. The history of Chinese characters in China has been advancing with the times and changing actively. Even the cursive script itself can be completely understood as a traditional simplified writing form. In the 1950s, when the country carried out the reform of language and writing, many simplified characters were capitalized in cursive script. Isn't this a kind of respect and inheritance for history and tradition? So, I want to ask my opponent: If you think traditional Chinese characters are the inheritance and development of traditional culture; So, how to understand the profound historical phenomenon that Chinese characters have been developing and evolving? How can you be sure that the traditional Chinese characters you see are not the result of more traditional Chinese characters transformation? It can be seen that understanding the inheritance of Chinese characters from the perspective of historical development just shows that it is an inevitable trend for Chinese characters to develop from complexity to simplicity.

? Third, it is unreasonable. Another obvious mistake in insisting on teaching traditional Chinese characters in the classroom is that it is also logically untenable. Because, from the perspective of cognitive relationship, the premise of understanding the inevitability of a thing is that we must first understand what is the connotation of the core concept of this thing. Otherwise, the name is not justified, so all the arguments become meaningless. Specifically, in order to think about the so-called traditional Chinese character education, it is necessary to clarify the nature of traditional Chinese characters. The so-called difference between complexity and simplicity is essentially the difference between writing forms. Undoubtedly, the fundamental function of language is that it is an important communication tool and information carrier. As for the cultural connotation and historical context carried by the word meaning, it is often the secondary value produced in the process of communication. After all, as far as words are concerned, there has never been a civilized password independently generated without communication. As long as other debaters understand the historical fate of those characters in human history who can no longer be used because of genocide or integration and civilization extinction, they can clearly realize that once the characters lose their concrete and vivid ideological soil and interpersonal communication context, even their survival itself becomes a problem. What about education? As Mr. Lu Xun said, "to preserve the quintessence of the country, we must also preserve the quintessence of the country." . Therefore, we have every reason to believe that the inheritance of culture and the survival of civilization by writing must be based on the premise that writing itself adapts to the needs of human development and the changing trend of the times. Otherwise, if the skin does not exist, how can the hair be attached? The tool itself has been eliminated, and it is absurd to talk about its use value. It's just like those cauldrons displayed in the museum. Of course, we know that they are cultural relics and historical witnesses, which are worth cherishing. But if someone plans to use them to boil water and cook today, I'm afraid it will be a very ridiculous thing. Moreover, if we can consider it based on the background of the development of internet technology today, the input efficiency of Chinese characters is really related to the long-term development of Chinese characters in the future and to the historical task of Chinese traditional civilization to complete modernization and transformation; At this point, simplified characters obviously have incomparable advantages.

? To sum up, we believe that it is neither necessary nor realistic to let traditional Chinese characters be taught in the classroom. That's the end of my speech, thank you!