網站 http://www.happyforum.org/ 歡迎超連結並轉寄網址
論壇 http://www.happyforum.org/happy/ 歡迎至論壇討論
第124次例會，2007年09月22日（週六）下午2:30~5:30
Place：
viewtopic.php?t=15
Time:
14:30 ~15:30 (Free Talks)
15:30~16:00(Speaker Session)
16:00~17:15 (Topic Discussion)
17:15~17:30 (Happy Time)
Host: Willie Cheng
Assistant Host: Amy Kao
Topic: Measuring manners in major metropolises
Source: GVO October 2006 magazine high-intermediate/advanced P.54 - P.56
“Looking out for No. 1” has long been the secret to survival on the mean streets of New York, right? It certainly fits that “me first” image that many people have of New Yorkers. According to an issue of Reader’s Digest published this past summer, however, Manhattan is manner-less no more. In the study of big city dwellers across the globe, New Yorkers beat out all comers in the politeness department. The populace is so courteous there, in fact, that it took top honors in the magazine’s latest “Global Courtesy Test”.
As hard as it is to believe that the Big Apple isn’t as rotten as many of us have always assumed, it’s equally hard to swallow that Taipei came in only at No. 28 considering that a total of 35 metropolises were examined in the study, that doesn’t say much for the way that Taipei residents conduct themselves ---- on days that Reader’s Digest reporters were in town, at any rate. Based on their observations, Taipei residents only managed 26 on a scale of 60 ---- a full seven points below the 33-point average.
If Taipei ranks so low among such a large sampling of major cities on planet Earth, it’s worth asking what criteria was used in determining who’s courteous and who’s not? As it turns out, “document drops,” “door tests” and “service tests” were the methods employed in separating the rude from the polite. The Taipei Times quoted Radio Taiwan International talk show host Andrew Ryan as saying that the survey was “flawed” for utilizing primarily Western standards of courtesy. Or as the Central News Agency reported on the subject, Mayor Ma Ying-jeep observed: “People sometimes have different opinions on ‘friendly’ or “courteous’ due to the culture gap.”
Taipei scored worst in the document drop portion of the survey, with only four other municipalities receiving lower marks. In staged accidents, Reader’s Digest reporters dropped files on sidewalks, in foyers and other places with heavy pedestrian traffic. The more passersby that stopped to help pick up the scattered documents, the more polite the populace, or so the logic went. Since few people appeared willing to aid in picking up dropped papers here in Taipei, the city scored poorly on this segment.
Differing with that interpretation of the results was Lo Chih-Cheng, head of the Taipei Information Department. Asians, he said, were more likely to pretend that they didn’t see documents spill out of the file “mainly to prevent the awkwardness (sic) of the victim.” Calling attention to the victim’s plight would only serve to heighten his or her sense of embarrassment, or so Lo believed.
When it came to the door test, Taipei fared a little bit better than in the document drop, but there was still room for improvement. In conducting the test, Reader’s Digest reporters trailed closely behind individuals as they entered buildings and discovered that, in Taipei, at any rate, the door was seldom held open for them. At least the Taiwanese capital managed to score quite highly on the service test, where clerks at shops and convenience stores were observed extending a hearty welcome as soon as potential customers set foot inside.
The aforementioned radio personality Ryan senses that a lot of courtesy which locals extended to others must have gone overlooked by Readers’ Digest reporters while they were here. “The way that mass rapid transit passengers give up their seats for each other, the way men hold women’s bags for them…. These are all acts of courtesy that Westerners would do well to learn from the Taiwanese, “he noted in the Taipei Times quote.
Reader’s Digest Global Courtesy Test Results
(Figures indicate percentage of people that passed in each city)
New York, USA (80%) Paris, France (57%)
Zurich, Switzerland (77%) Amsterdam, Netherlands (52%)
Toronto, Canada (70%) Helsinki, Finland (48%)
Berlin, Germany (68%) Manila, Philippines (48%)
Sao Paulo, Brazil (68%) Sydney, Australia (47%)
Zagreb, Croatia (68%) Bangkok, Thailand (45%)
Auckland, New Zealand (67%) Hong Kong (45%)
Warsaw, Poland (67%) Ljubljana, Slovenia (45%)
Mexico City, Mexico (65%) Jakarta, Indonesia (43%)
Stockholm, Sweden (63%) Taipei, Taiwan (43%)
Budapest, Hungary (60%) Moscow, Russia (42%)
Madrid, Spain (60%) Singapore (42%)
Prague, Czech Republic (60%) Seoul, South Korea (40%)
Vienna, Austria (60%) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (37%)
Buenos Aires, Argentina (57%) Bucharest, Romania (35%)
Johannesburg, South Africa (57%) Mumbai, India (32%)
Lisbon, Portugal (57%) Milan, Italy (47%)
London, United Kingdom (57%)
Vocabulary:
1. Comer 來者 7. Criteria 標準
2. Populace全體居民 8. Flawed 有缺點的
3. Courteous 有禮貌的 9. Municipality 市政當局
4. Sampling 抽樣 10. Foyer 門廳
5. Interpretation 解釋/解讀 11. Awkwardness 難為情/尷尬
6. Plight 困境
Discussion:
1. Do you think Taipei got an unfair shake (獲得不公平待遇) in this survey?
2. What’s the rudest city (or country) that you’ve ever visited?
例會須知 參與例會，請自行列印當週的討論文章並帶至現場，圖示如下：
請將社團網站，加入我的最愛 http://www.happyforum.org/
台北，每週六 (2005年6月起)
Taipei, Saturday, Weekly
from June, 2005
Place：
viewtopic.php?t=15
高雄，每月最後一個週日 (2007年4月起)
Kaohsiung, Final Sunday, Monthly
from April, 2007
Place：
viewtopic.php?t=15
20070922, Speaker--Warren Chiang
20070922, Speaker--Loren Yu
20070922, Game Conductor--Lancy Wang
20070922, Gathering and Feedback
20070922, Louis/Luis/Louise
20070922, Saturday Dinner
