33

discriminatory trade policy. Most APEC countries have consistently maintained open trade policy with non-member countries (Sampson, 1997). This open trade policy has somewhat contributed to the rapid economic development of these APEC countries (Langhammer, 1999).

Conclusion

This study confirms the assertion that a higher level of trade interdependence already existed among the APEC countries during the period of 1989-98. The prospective FTA would further enhance the intraAPEC trade flows after its completion. Being the second largest regional grouping after the EU, the direction of APEC's global trade liberalization strategy will have far reaching impact on other trading blocs.

Suggestions for Future Research

Further analysis of the prospective APEC FTA has significant implications for the world trade in the next decade. The APEC grouping already includes two major regional trading arrangements in North America (NAFTA) and Asia (ASEAN). The APEC membership will be expanded to include not only the Asia Pacific countries, but also major trading nations from other continents (Langhatmner, 1999). Major trading countries in South America (MERCOSUR grouping) have expressed interest in joining the APEC. There are indications that the APEC has started to develop closer economic relations with the EU since 1996 (Dent, 1998). The APEC realizes the EU's role in achieving global integration. Given the potential positive impact of the APEC FTA on the world trade, the concept of a global free trade area will be a realistic topic for future research.

References:

1.Brada, Josef C. and Jose A. Mendez, "Economic integration among developed, developing and centrally planned economies: A comparative analysis," Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 67, No. 4 (November), pp. 549-556, 1985.

2.Cheong, Inkyо, "The Effects of APEC Trade Reform on Structural Adjustments of Member Economies," Singapore Economic Review, Vol. 42, No. 1 (April), pp. 1- 18, 1997.

3.Cheong, Inkyo, "The Potential Obstacles to Economic Cooperation in the AsiaPacific Region," International Trade Journal, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Winter), pp. 445463, 1998.

34

4.Dent, Christopher M., "Regionalism in Southeast Asia: Opportunities and Threats for the European Union," European Business Review, Vol. 98, No. 4, pp. 184-196, 1998.

1.Analyze the structure of the article. What are the compositional parts of the paper?

2.Read the article again and find the signposting and linking words in each part of it. Identify their functions.

3.Translate the article paying attention to the underlined words and phrases.

4. Search for more information about the history of APEC. Answer the questions.

1)When was APEC established and what was the purpose of its establishment?

2)Who are the members of APEC?

3)What are the main areas of APEC activity?

4)What are the principles on which the activity of APEC is based?

5)What are the benefits of being a member of APEC?

6)How often are the meetings held?

7)Where and when was the last summit held? What issues were discussed and what were the results of the summit meeting?

5.Render the article. Refer to the «Recommendations for making rendering» in the Supplementary Material section.

6.Find an article in your field of study and analyze its structure and language. Render the article.

WRITING SUMMARY.

What is the summary?

A summary is a brief, concise description of a piece of writing. Summarizing is an important part of learning or studying material. If you can adequately summarize the ideas incorporated in an article, chapter, or book then you must certainly be able to understand it well enough to use it appropriately in the future.

What makes a good summary?

Essentially, a summary is a condensed version of something, usually a text. A good summary is concise, focusing on the main ideas, and leaving out much of the

35

supporting and explanatory detail of the original text. A good summary is also complete, covering all of the important ideas found in the primary text. Moreover, a summary should be objective; the goal should be to cover the text fairly, without inserting one's own opinion or perspective. For this reason, a summary is not really an essay. An essay requires the writer to create an original text, as in an argument wherein one asserts a point of view, or a research paper in which one synthesizes and analyzes the work of many others.

1.A good summary should give an objective outline of the whole piece of writing. It should answer basic questions about the original text such as "Who did what, where, and when?", or "What is the main idea of the text?", "What are the main supporting points?", «What are the major pieces of evidence?”.

It should not be a paraphrase of the whole text using your own words.

2.You should not give your own ideas or criticisms as part of the summary. However, if you want to comment on a piece of writing it is usual to begin by summarizing it as objectively as possible.

3.A good summary should not include selected examples, details, or information which are not relevant to the piece of writing taken as a whole.

4.A good summary should probably include the main idea of each paragraph, and the main evidence supporting that idea, unless it is not relevant to the article or essay as a whole. A summary does not need a conclusion, but if the original ends with a message to the reader this should not be left out.

5.A good summary may use key words from the original text but should not contain whole phrases or sentences from the original unless quotation marks are used. Quotations should only be made if there is a reason for using the original words, for example because the choice of words is significant, or because the original is so well expressed.

6.Rearranging the words used in the original, or keeping the same structure but just substituting different words is not enough. You must express the sense of the original using your own words and structures. In such cases, it is extremely important to use your own words, or quotation marks if you are actually quoting, in order to avoid plagiarism.

Contents of a Summary

The chief problem in writing a summary is deciding what to include and what to omit. A summary, after all, is a much abbreviated version of the original; it is a streamlined review of only the most significant points. You will not help your readers

37

1.Opinion. Avoid injecting opinions—your own, the author’s, or a speaker’s. You distract readers from grasping main points by saying that the report was too long or that it missed the main point, or that a salesperson from Detroit monopolized the meetings, or that the author in a digression took the Land Commission to task for failing to act properly. A later section of this chapter will deal with evaluative summaries.

2.New data. Stick to the original article, report, book, or meeting. Avoid introducing comparisons with other works or conferences, because readers will expect a digest of only the material being summarized.

3.Irrelevant specifics. Do not include any biographical details about the author of an article. Although many journals contain a section entitled "notes on contributors," this information plays no role in the reader’s understanding of your summary.

4.Examples. Illustrations, explanations, and descriptions are unnecessary in a summary. Readers must know outcomes, results, and recommendations, not the illustrative details supporting or elaborating on those results.

5.Background. Material in introductions to articles, reports, and conferences can usually be excluded from a summary. These "lead-ins" prepare the reader for a discussion of the subject by presenting background information, anecdotes, and details that will be of little interest to readers who want a summary to give them the big picture.

6.Reference data. Exclude information found in footnotes, bibliographies, appendixes, tables, or graphs. All such information supports rather than expresses conclusions and recommendations.

7.Jargon. Technical definitions or jargon in the original may confuse rather than clarify the essential information for the reader.

How to write a summary of a short piece of writing:

1.As you read, underline all the important points and all the important evidence. For example, you could look for all the topic sentences.

2.List or cluster the main idea of the whole piece, the main supporting ideas, and the main evidence for each idea. Be careful to use your own words rather than copying or just rearranging. Do not include too much detail.

3.Change the order if necessary, so that the main idea comes first and is followed by the supporting ideas and evidence in a logical sequence. Omit any repetitions.

4.If the original uses 'I' replace this with the writer's actual surname, "the writer", or "s/he". If the original uses 'you', substitute "people" or "they".

5.You should now be ready to write the summary. Start with a sentence that a)

38

identifies the writer and the piece of writing, for example by giving the writer's name, the title of the piece and where/when it appeared, and b) gives the main idea. Use transition words to join everything together.

Phrases used in summaries

1.For more information about summarizing refer to the Supplementary Material section. Answer the questions.

1) What is the summary?

2) What is the goal of writing a summary? What makes it different from an essay? 3) What should be included in a summary?

4) How long should a summary be?

5) What are the main steps of writing a summary?

2.Read the following summaries and select the best one for the report.

39

Summary A

The aim of this project is to design a car using fuel cell technology. The technology is investigated and an outline of two designs is given. Each design is suitable for a different market, but both are designed to the same criteria. Sketches are provided for each design.

Summary B

Two alternative designs for a fuel cell powered car are presented.

Car A, which uses hydrogen fuel, is a sedan designed for the executive market. It provides extra luxury for the driver, but is spacious enough for family use. Car B, powered by hydrogen and oxygen, is a medium sized hatchback which offers a range of features for the family. While both cars are efficient for short trips, they lack the range and speed desirable for long journeys.

Both cars incorporate similar safety features and fulfil the design criteria of having low exhaust emissions and using environmentally friendly materials; however, Car B is recommended as it has slightly lower power consumption and is more economical to manufacture.

2. Now read the comments and see if you were right.

Summary A is weak. Although it clearly states the topic of the report, it then only outlines the type of information included in the report. It should briefly outline the key features of the technology and the distinguishing features of the two designs as well as the outcome of the work; for example, a recommendation of one of the designs. Summary B is superior because it contains a summary of the actual information contained in the report, and gives the conclusion. Summary A may be considered rather a descriptive abstract than a summary.

3. Read the following models of summaries. Pay attention to the underlined phrases. Analyze the organization of the text.

In “Someone Is Stealing Your Life” (The LA Weekly, 26 Jan. 1990), Michael Ventura argues that American workers are being treated as slaves, and calls on employers to value the contribution of workers to the success of companies. For the majority of Americans, the ideal that the individual is free to find his or her own happiness is an illusion. Employees have no control over any aspect of their work and the living standards that they are able to achieve by working have declined. Those who wish to control their working lives do so by becoming employers, but in order to become

40

profitable, they have to exploit their workers to the full. The author accepts that successful entrepreneurs deserve high rewards for their hard work and the risks they have taken. He also recognizes the role played by investors. However, he argues that the success of a company derives from the hard work of the employees as well. They deserve to share in the rewards and they should also be involved in major company decisions since these affect their lives. The author asserts that his view is worth of consideration because it is based on his experience in a variety of lower paid jobs, not on academic study.

In “Our Schedules, Our Selves” (Utne Reader, Jan.-Feb. 2003), Jay Walljasper points out that instead of increased leisure, technological progress has produced a situation where our lives are dominated by tightly organized schedules. There are three main causes. First, the increase in economic activity caused by globalization combined with the disenfranchisement of labor have forced lower-paid workers to work harder in order to make ends meet and put even higher-paid workers under more pressure. Second, new technology means that we can never be beyond the reach of the office. Finally, we are faced with a greater choice of leisure activities so we tend to overload even our non-work schedules. As a result, every second of our life is planned in advance and we have lost the freedom to act on impulse. One solution is political: to shorten working hours, increase paid holidays, and give workers more power in the workplace. Another is to change our attitudes to time, so that we control our schedules rather than being controlled by them.

In “Los Pobres” (an extract from Hunger of Memory, New York: Bantam Books, 1983), Richard Rodriguez describes the impact of an encounter with a group of unskilled Mexican laborers while he was working on a construction site during his university summer vacation. When he began the job he hoped that by experiencing physical labor, which his father considered to be genuine work, he would achieve a closer understanding of his immigrant roots. However, he realized three things. The first was that he would never reach a full understanding of the nature of physical labor because he knew that his experience of it was temporary. The second was his discovery that there was no one type of worker, but that they were all diverse individuals and that the majority were middle-class in their outlook. Third, the subdued behavior of the Mexicans helped him to understand how his access to higher education had given him the power to assert his rights. Because of his privileged

41

background, he would never truly be able to understand the viewpoint of underprivileged members of society.

In "Students Shall Not Download. Yeah, Sure."(New York Times, 20.09.03), Kate Zernike describes the attitudes of students at Pennsylvania State University to illegal downloading of Internet material. She points out that while they are aware of the illegality, they think that is all right to ignore the law on this issue, just as they ignore the age limit on the consumption of alcohol. This attitude is encouraged by various factors: the ease by which they are able to download, their assumption that the Internet belongs to everyone, and the availability of Internet services on campus and their importance to university life. Warnings against illegal downloading from the university authorities have little effect because students do not agree that such downloading causes any harm. In fact, they argue that they spend money on bands that they would not know about had it not been for illegal downloads. Unlike older people, they see no point in paying money to buy a recording of a song. Threats of punishment make students more cautious, but in no way lead them to stop downloading.

Model answer to "Write a summary of Daniel Anderson's findings about television's influence on children, as explained by Madeline Drexler on pp. 176-178."

In "Don't Touch That Dial" (Boston Globe, 28.07.91), Madeline Drexler introduces the findings of Daniel Anderson, a psychologist and academic who thinks we should focus on the role of television in families and society as a whole rather than on its effect on children's mental development. In fact, he denies that watching television lowers IQ scores. Children watch television actively, learning to analyse the images that they see. Moreover, the time that they spend watching television is not time that would otherwise have been spent reading. The real debate should be about the possible effect of the content of television on children's ways of thinking, not about televisionwatching itself. Schools should use television as a way of teaching critical thinking. Parents should watch television with their children and talk about it, rather than using it as a baby-sitter. They should pay attention to the quality of what their children watch; if a child seems to watch too much, they need to ask what else the child has to do, and whether s/he is trying to escape real life for some reason.

Basic model (from New Directions, p.59 -63):

In "School is Bad for Children" (The Saturday Evening Post, 8.02.69), John Holt argues that orthodox education systems ruin children's emotional and intellectual development, and suggests various improvements. He points out that pre-school