Voici un exemple de sujet (article suivi d'une question de compréhension et d'une question d'expression). A la suite du texte et des questions, vous trouverez des conseils méthodologiques et une proposition de corrigé. Si vous souhaitez télécharger le document pour plus de clarté (3 pages), il est joint au bas de cette page.
Don't blame fast food, television or the car - fat is a technological issue
Ashley Seager, The Guardian, December 2004
We've long blamed television for turning us into a nation of couch potatoes but now the dismal science is weighing in with the idea that it is technology, rather than a change in tastes or the growth of fast food restaurants, that is the cause of obesity.
Professor Carol Propper, of Bristol University, says economics can bring valuable insights into the world of over-eating and says technology has both reduced the cost of food as well as making work and life less strenuous.
She delivered a paper on Friday to the Royal Economic Society that contained many well-known but still shocking figures. Obesity has risen dramatically in the past 10 years alone. More than 21% of men and women in Britain are too heavy for their height. A decade ago the figures were 13% of men and 16% of women. The only country in a worse situation than Britain is the United States.
Obesity causes 30,000 deaths a year and costs the NHS about £500m a year and the economy £2bn through sickness and early death.
So far, so well known. But Prof Propper says it is quite wrong to blame fast-food outlets or convenience food in supermarkets for the problem. They are a reflection of it rather than a cause.
She breaks down her analysis to what has happened to the price of consuming calories and what has happened to cost of expending them.
"We eat more because of improved technology," she says. Improvements in agricultural technology have reduced the price of food while microwave ovens, food preservatives and packaging technology have cut the time to prepare food.
In 1965, non-working married women spent more than two hours a day cooking and cleaning up after meals. Now the equivalent time is less than an hour. This, says Prof Propper, has led to an increase in the quantity and variety of food consumed.
The decrease in the price of food has benefited the poor most and it is the poor who have seen their weight increase the fastest, says Prof Propper.
Calorifically speaking, the cheapest foods are packed with sugar, fat and refined grains. Their long shelf life means they are available in most convenience stores, more often used by the poor. In the US, for example, one in four people below the poverty line are obese while only one in six of the better off are.
Thus, she says, the idea of taxing fast or convenience foods, which is increasingly discussed in Britain and the US, would hit the poor disproportionately hard.
Her study has also found that the main reason for an increase in calorie intake is down to an increase in snacking, particularly in the home, rather than to bigger portions or fattening meals in fast-food restaurants.
Technology has also allowed consumption of chips to rise dramatically. Decades ago lots of potatoes were consumed but generally in boiled, mashed or baked form because chips were too much hassle to prepare. Now chips are mass-produced in factories, frozen and sold to be reheated in microwaves.
Evidence suggests that 40% of weight gain in Britain or the US is due to the effects of better agricultural technology pushing prices down while 60% is due to the so-called "demand effects" of declining physical activity in the home and workplace.
"In a post-industrial society, work entails relatively little exercise. Payment is mostly in terms of forgone leisure, because leisure-based exercise must be substituted for exercise on the job.
"So the cost of expending calories has increased. Together this means weight has risen," says Prof Propper.
Interestingly, to return to couch potatoes, television cannot be blamed for the rise in obesity in the last 20 years. Evidence from both the UK and the US shows that the increase in hours spent watching television rose until 1980 but has not risen since.
Nor can we blame the car. The big rise in people using their car to drive to work also occurred prior to 1980, according to data from the US.
QUESTIONS
1. According to the author, what effects has technology had on eating habits?
Answer the question in your own words (about 200 words).
2. Do you think technology sometimes has negative effects? Give examples (about 200 words).
Propositions de corrigés
Rappelons que les deux questions donnent lieu à deux exercices différents : la Question 1 est une synthèse-reformulation, où ne doit apparaître que ce qui est dit dans le document ; la Question 2 est un essai personnel où le candidat est censé donner son avis de façon argumentée et structurée.
Question 1
Afin de préparer la Réponse 1, le candidat doit, armé d'un surligneur, faire une lecture rapide de l'article à la recherche de tous les éléments pertinents qui vont lui permettre de répondre. Sauf exception, il est rare que l'intégralité de l'article soit exploitable, et il faut éviter une erreur fréquente, qui serait de faire un résumé-contraction de l'ensemble du document.
Ce relevé étant fait, il faut passer à un premier résumé-bilan de ce qui est dit, en éliminant les redites et tout ce qui ne concerne pas directement la question posée, à savoir ici l'influence de la technique sur les habitudes alimentaires.
S'il faut absolument éviter le copié-collé de phrases entières, lourdement pénalisé par les correcteurs, il ne faut en revanche pas perdre de temps à essayer de tout reformuler : un four à microondes se dit « microwave oven » des frites « chips », et vous avez bien sûr le droit de vous approprier ces mots bien qu'ils soient déjà utilisés dans l'article.
Proposition de réponse
Based on the findings* of a survey led by a British professor, the article sheds new light* on the causes of obesity, an increasingly serious issue in view of the growing percentage of the population it affects. According to Professor Propper, the usual suspects- fast food, television and the car-should be exonerated*, for it is actually technology that should bear the brunt* of the blame.
First, because technological progress in the fields of farming, packaging and household appliances* has caused foodstuffs to become more varied and affordable, and easier to cook. This has enabled people, particularly the poor, to eat more than they used to and to become increasingly overweight, all the more so since the new products developed by the food-processing industry are generally rich in fat and sugar. For instance chips, once an occasional treat, have-thanks to deep freeze and the microwave oven-become everyday fare* in many households.
Second, because technology has made matters worse by, at the same time, gradually eliminating physical effort from everyday life-machines, tools and vehicles have taken over, depriving people of the opportunity they had to shed their increasing calorie intake either at home or in the workplace.
(200 words)
findings : conclusions, résultats d'une étude.
to shed new light on stg : éclairer qqch d'un jour nouveau.
to exonerate : disculper.
to bear the brunt of : supporter la plus grande part, le plus gros de qqch.
household appliances : l'électroménager.
everyday fare : l'ordinaire, le menu quotidien.
Question 2
Après un article qui décrivait les effets pervers du progrès technique sur le tour de taille des consommateurs, et une Réponse 1 déjà consacrée aux effets néfastes de ce progrès sur les habitudes alimentaires, il n'était pas question de repartir sur le même sujet dans la Réponse 2. Pas de piège pourtant ici : il suffisait de réfléchir quelques instants à d'autres domaines (et les exemples ne manquaient pas) où le progrès technique a pu aussi avoir à terme des conséquences négatives.
Au cours de la finalisation, il fallait éviter deux écueils auxquels se heurtent aussi souvent les préparationnaires: d'une part, la focalisation sur un seul exemple (Internet ou le nucléaire), qui ne permet pas de “tenir” sur 200 mots et amène à commettre des redites ; l'autre extrême étant la « laundry list », simple énumération longuette et sans tri de tous les maux engendrés par le progrès technique.
Proposition de réponse
Technological progress is seen as a positive phenomenon, insofar as it makes life easier and more comfortable. Over the past decades, breakthroughs* in transportation and telecommunication technology have enabled people to use devices even Jules Verne failed to foresee. Meanwhile, nuclear engineers have caused France to become less dependent on oil imports for its energy. Electricity and heating therefore come cheap, and distance does not matter anymore, since anybody can use a mobile phone, the Internet, high-speed trains and jets.
However, progress often turns out to be a mixed blessing*, since it usually comes at a cost. This can be environmental: our cars and industrial activities have depleted the resources of the planet and caused global warming; our nuclear plants have ruined once pristine* landscapes and keep producing tons of waste whose storage is still a pending issue*. The costs can also be social: the advent of a new technology usually means bankruptcy and redundancies for the companies that are being replaced. Worse, progress helps widen the gap between those who can afford to adapt and those who lack the money to do so. I may enjoy using my laptop and cellphone while riding the TGV to Marseilles*, now a mere three-hour trip, yet I realize that millions of inhabitants of the so-called global village still cannot benefit from such luxuries.
(224 words)
breakthrough : avancée, découverte capitale.
to be a mixed blessing : ne pas présenter que des avantages.
pristine : intact, inviolé.
a pending issue : un problème non résolu, en souffrance.
Marseilles : pensez à angliciser ces villes françaises : Lyons, Rheims, Dunkirk.