假設兩個人正在討論在家工作。
第一個人說：
Working from home gives employees more flexibility.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡ2juVUguk7N
在家工作能讓員工有更大的彈性。
第二個人說：
Working from home can make communication more difficult.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡUPtjxGFnae
在家工作可能讓溝通變得更困難。
最直接的重述方式是：
The first speaker said that working from home is flexible. The second speaker said that communication is difficult.
文法沒有大問題，意思也大致正確，但兩個觀點仍然分開擺着。你只是報告了「第一個人說什麼」和「第二個人說什麼」，卻沒有真正說明他們的意見有什麼關係。
比較清楚的說法是：
The first speaker focused on the flexibility of working from home, while the second was more concerned about communication difficulties.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡcaTKWQ6Y5j
第一位講者着重在家工作的彈性，而第二位則較關注溝通上的困難。
這裡的 while 不是表示「在……期間」，而是用來對比兩個不同重點。
先看他們是同意，還是不同意
比較觀點之前，先不要急着找漂亮句型。你要先判斷兩個人到底是：
- 完全同意
- 部分同意
- 看法不同
- 結論相同，但理由不同
例如：
Speaker A：
Online learning is convenient because students can study from home.
Speaker B：
Online learning is convenient, although it may reduce social interaction.
這兩個人並不是完全相反。兩人都認為線上學習很方便，只是第二位講者另外提出了一個問題。
因此可以說：
Both speakers agreed that online learning is convenient, although the second speaker was concerned about reduced social interaction.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡUM1wvAwwwX
兩位講者都同意線上學習很方便，不過第二位講者擔心社交互動會因此減少。
如果一開始就說：
The speakers disagreed about online learning.
就不夠準確，因為他們其實有一部分意見相同。
不要只比較句子，要比較重點
有時兩個人講的內容表面上不同，但真正差異在於他們關注的事情不同。
例如：
Speaker A：
University education should be free because everyone deserves equal access.
Speaker B：
Students should pay part of the cost because universities require stable funding.
可以說：
While the first speaker emphasised equal access to education, the second focused on the financial needs of universities.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡE64XW4vy8A
第一位講者強調平等接受教育的機會，而第二位則着重大學的財務需要。
這比單純說：
One person supports free education, but the other does not.
更清楚，因為它說出了兩人背後的理由。
幾個實用的比較方式
當兩個觀點有共同之處：
Both speakers agreed that…19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡYU2lbly9cn
兩位講者都同意……
They shared the view that…19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡhP0aV6Iyvq
他們都認為……
當兩個觀點不同：
While one speaker…, the other…19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡFzFgavk7k0
一位講者……，而另一位則……
The first speaker focused on…, whereas the second emphasised…19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡS1YL0c6yXm
第一位講者着重……，第二位則強調……
當兩人結論相近，但理由不同：
Both speakers supported the idea, but for different reasons.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡguoxbkg9fj
兩位講者都支持這個想法，但理由不同。
這些不是要逐句背下來的模板。真正重要的是，先判斷兩個觀點之間的關係，再選擇最適合的說法。
在 PTE 的 Summarize Group Discussion、IELTS 口說、學校報告或工作會議中，清楚比較觀點都很有用。聽者通常不需要你重新播放一次整場對話，他們更想知道：大家同意了什麼，又在哪裡開始分道揚鑣。
今日練習
以下五題的難度會逐步增加。
先不要看參考答案。每題先找出觀點之間的共同點或差異，再用完整英文整理。
1
Speaker A：
Public transport should be cheaper so that more people can afford to use it.
Speaker B：
Public transport should be more reliable so that commuters can arrive on time.
請用 while 或 whereas，寫一句比較兩人的重點。
2
Speaker A：
Online classes allow students to learn from any location.
Speaker B：
Online classes are flexible, but students may have fewer opportunities to interact with classmates.
請用兩句英文說明：
- 兩人在哪一點意見相同
- 第二位講者另外提出了什麼問題
3
Speaker A：
Governments should encourage people to exercise because this could reduce healthcare costs.
Speaker B：
Governments should encourage exercise because healthier people may enjoy a better quality of life.
兩人支持相同政策，但理由不同。請用一句英文概括。
4
Speaker A：
University education should be free because financial barriers prevent some students from studying.
Speaker B：
Students should pay part of their tuition because universities need sufficient funding to maintain teaching quality.
請不要只說兩人「同意」或「不同意」。用兩至三句英文說出：
- 他們爭論的核心問題
- 第一位講者最關注什麼
- 第二位講者最關注什麼
5
三位講者正在討論城市交通：
Speaker A：
The government should build more roads because traffic congestion is getting worse.
Speaker B：
Building more roads will only encourage more people to drive. The government should invest in trains and buses instead.
Speaker C：
Public transport is important, but cycling infrastructure should also be improved because short journeys do not always require a car or a train.
請用大約三至四句英文概括這場討論。
不要逐句重複三位講者的原話。嘗試說出：
- 討論的共同主題
- 三人的主要差異
- 哪兩位講者的立場比較接近
參考答案
以下只是參考版本。只要準確說出觀點之間的關係，其他寫法也可以成立。
1
The first speaker argued that public transport should be cheaper, while the second focused on making it more reliable.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡs7hfIUQLF3
第一位講者主張公共交通應該更便宜，而第二位則着重提升它的可靠程度。
這裡不是單純比較「便宜」和「可靠」，而是比較兩人認為最需要改善的地方。
2
Both speakers agreed that online classes offer greater flexibility. However, the second speaker was also concerned that students might have fewer opportunities for social interaction.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡnhnTVukyYz
兩位講者都同意線上課程更加有彈性。不過，第二位講者亦擔心學生可能會減少與其他人互動的機會。
不要寫成兩人完全不同意。第一位只提到優點，第二位則在承認優點的同時補充了缺點。
3
Both speakers supported government action to encourage exercise, but the first focused on reducing healthcare costs, whereas the second emphasised quality of life.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡN29SdSoUX8
兩位講者都支持政府鼓勵市民運動，但第一位着重減少醫療支出，第二位則強調生活品質。
這種情況叫做「結論相同，理由不同」。
4
The speakers disagreed about who should pay for university education. The first speaker emphasised equal access and argued that tuition fees may prevent some students from studying. In contrast, the second focused on the need for universities to maintain sufficient funding and teaching quality.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡ5CYWhvScCh
兩位講者對大學教育費用應由誰負擔有不同看法。第一位強調平等接受教育的機會，認為學費可能令部分學生無法升學。相反，第二位則着重大學需要足夠資金維持教學品質。
這個答案不只報告立場，也說明了兩人背後的考慮。
5
The discussion focused on how cities should respond to traffic congestion. The first speaker supported building more roads, while the second argued that this would encourage further car use and preferred greater investment in public transport. The third speaker also supported alternatives to driving but placed greater emphasis on cycling infrastructure. Overall, the second and third speakers were more closely aligned because both wanted to reduce reliance on cars.19Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡLK9PwuAmEx
這場討論集中在城市應如何處理交通壅塞。第一位講者支持興建更多道路，第二位則認為這會鼓勵更多人駕車，並主張增加公共交通投資。第三位同樣支持提供駕車以外的選擇，但更着重單車基礎設施。整體而言，第二和第三位講者的立場較接近，因為兩人都希望減少對汽車的依賴。
比較觀點不是把每個人的說話重新排隊讀一次。真正的工作，是找出他們在哪裡握手，又在哪裡各自轉身走了。
ns216.73.216.179da2
and then Add to home screen.