Module 6 · Listening & Speaking Strands · Lesson 21
Listening Part 4 Many Voices
Multiple matching from monologues
Get talking · Section 1
4 minGet talking
Theme: 'Why I changed careers.' If you heard five real people on this theme, what FIVE different INTENTIONS could they have? (E.g. to justify, to warn, to celebrate, to regret, to advise.)
Speaker A says 'It was challenging.' Speaker B says 'It was challenging.' Same words — how do you know they mean opposite things?
Listen to ONLY a speaker's opening line: 'Look, I'll be honest with you.' What's their likely INTENTION across the next 30 seconds?
Reporting attitude and stance — the grammar of paraphrase
Quick rule
P4 options paraphrase the speaker using REPORTING + STANCE verbs: 'admits', 'acknowledges', 'regrets', 'plays down', 'warns against', 'is surprised by'. Learn the verbs and you can hear the speaker through the option.
Cambridge writes the P4 options in a specific dialect: short reporting verbs that compress 30 seconds of speech into one stance. 'The speaker ACKNOWLEDGES that…' means the speaker admitted something they might have preferred not to say. 'The speaker PLAYS DOWN…' means the speaker minimised the importance of something. The right option is the one whose stance verb actually matches what the speaker DID — not what they SAID. The trap is the option that uses a word the speaker used but a stance verb that doesn't fit.
Examples
Speaker: 'Look, yes, the first year was rough — but honestly, every career change is.' → ACKNOWLEDGES initial difficulty while playing it down as normal.
Speaker: 'I'd think very carefully before doing what I did.' → WARNS others against following her path.
Speaker: 'Even I'm amazed it worked out.' → expresses SURPRISE at her own success.
Trap watch — speaker said 'I love it now' but the option 'celebrates the success of her decision' may be wrong if she's actually GRUDGING.
Quick check
Question 1.Speaker: 'Honestly? I wouldn't recommend it to a friend.' Best paraphrase:
Question 2.Speaker: 'I won't pretend the pay cut wasn't real — but it's worth it.' Best paraphrase:
Question 3.Which P4 option is the LEXICAL-OVERLAP trap if the speaker said 'training was intense'?
Question 4.Speaker: 'I keep waiting to feel like a fraud — and it hasn't happened.' Best paraphrase:
Question 5.Why does P4 paraphrase rather than quote?
Words & phrases to own
to acknowledge
to admit something that's true, often reluctantly
e.g. She acknowledges that the first year was financially difficult.
Use it now
Use 'acknowledges' to paraphrase a real opinion of yours.
↻ Recycled in listening · speaking
to play (something) down
to minimise its importance
e.g. He plays down the risk, but the figures suggest otherwise.
Use it now
Think of something you tend to play down. Why?
↻ Recycled in listening · speaking
to warn against
to caution others not to do something
e.g. She warns against romanticising career change.
Use it now
Warn against one common piece of bad advice you hear.
↻ Recycled in listening
to express surprise at
neutral reporting frame for 'I can't believe…'
e.g. He expresses surprise at how quickly his confidence returned.
Use it now
Paraphrase: 'Honestly, I can't believe how much I love it.' → He…
↻ Recycled in listening
to regret (doing)
to wish you hadn't done it
e.g. She regrets not making the change five years earlier.
Use it now
Distinguish 'regret doing X' (did it, wishes she hadn't) vs 'regret not doing X' (didn't, wishes she had).
↻ Recycled in listening · speaking
with hindsight
looking back, knowing what we know now
e.g. With hindsight, the warning signs were obvious.
Use it now
Apply 'with hindsight' to a decision in your life.
↻ Recycled in listening · speaking
Pair / group discussion
- Which of today's verbs would HARDEST to spot in a real speaker — and why?
- Which two would you find easiest to USE yourself in Speaking Parts 3/4?
Complete each stem about yourself
- The speaker acknowledges ______.…
- He plays down ______, despite ______.…
- She warns against ______.…
- With hindsight, ______.…
Rank & justify
Rank by how directly each one signals the speaker's STANCE (not just the topic).
- acknowledges
- warns against
- plays down
- mentions
- describes
Quick write (60 seconds)
Paraphrase a 30-second opinion you've held this week using ONE of today's stance verbs.
Pronunciation · Section 4
3 minHearing stance through stress — where the emphasis falls
When a P4 speaker really means it, the stress lands on the EVALUATIVE word, not the noun. 'It was CHALLENGING' (genuine difficulty) is stressed differently from 'It was challenging' (dismissive). Train your ear for stress placement and you'll hear stance before you parse meaning.
- Genuine: 'It was REALLY HARD || I won't pretend it wasn't.'
- Dismissive: 'It was a bit hard || but you know.'
- Surprised: 'I keep WAITING to feel like a FRAUD || and it HASN'T happened.'
- Warning: 'I would think VERY carefully || before doing what I did.'
Reading · Section 5
8 minThe Architecture of Erasure
The evolution of our urban landscapes has often been a story of radical shifts rather than subtle transitions. In recent decades, the prevailing trend among developers and city planners has been one of 'regeneration'—a term that, while sounding inherently positive, frequently masks a more complex reality. All too often, the drive to modernise leads to what critics describe as the 'sterilisation' of city centres. When we witness the demolition of a nineteenth-century warehouse to make way for a modular steel-and-glass complex, we are seeing more than just a change in architecture; we are seeing the erasure of a neighbourhood's collective memory.
Prominent architects often play down the significance of these losses, framing them as the necessary price of progress. They argue that the outdated footprints of the past cannot accommodate the logistical demands of a twenty-first-century economy. However, this perspective overlooks the intrinsic value of the 'liminal spaces'—those pockets of the city that, while perhaps not aesthetically polished, provide the character and affordable spontaneity that allow local cultures to thrive. To acknowledge the utility of an old building is not merely an exercise in nostalgia; it is a recognition of the urban fabric’s need for continuity.
If we look at the results of the mid-2000s building boom, many urbanites now express surprise at the lack of longevity in what were once touted as 'state-of-the-art' developments. These structures, built with a narrow focus on immediate occupancy and high yields, often fail to foster a genuine sense of belonging. The residents, far from feeling integrated into a new community, often find themselves in transient environments that lack the 'grit' and soul of the areas they replaced. This highlights a critical failure in the grammar of modern planning: the tendency to prioritise the visual over the visceral.
I must admit that, in my early years as a junior consultant, I too was swept up in the 'arrogance of the new'. I remember advocating for the removal of a series of terraced houses to facilitate a sleek, multi-use plaza. With hindsight, the decision was a mistake. We traded a living, breathing community for a space that, while impressive in a portfolio, remained largely ignored by the people it was supposed to serve. We failed to warn against the dangers of over-gentrification, and the result was a vacuum where a culture used to be.
The challenge moving forward is to find a middle ground. We must resist the urge to either preserve the city in amber or to bulldoze its history into oblivion. Developers who regret doing away with the heritage of a site often do so only after the damage is done. Instead, the industry needs to adopt a stance of 'adaptive reuse'—incorporating the shells and stories of the past into the infrastructure of the future. By doing so, we can ensure that our cities remain places of growth, without losing the very heartbeat that made them worth living in in the first place. This requires a shift in how we report on and evaluate success in urban design, moving beyond square footage to measure the social health of a district.
Question 1.What is the writer’s main point in the first paragraph?
Question 2.In the third paragraph, the 'narrow focus' referred to implies...
Question 3.What does the phrase 'the arrogance of the new' suggest about the author's attitude?
Question 4.Which of the following best paraphrases the author's use of 'with hindsight' in the final paragraph?
Question 5.What is the intended effect of the author's description of developers 'brushing over the psychological toll'?
Question 6.What is the writer's tone when discussing the future of urban development?
Q1.The author believes that modern architectural requirements are entirely incompatible with older building structures.
Q2.The author suggests that architects sometimes deliberately minimize the cultural impact of their projects.
Q3.The author reflects on a past professional decision with a sense of personal accountability for its failure.
Q4.The author argues that providing green spaces is the most effective way to prevent the sterilization of cities.
Listening · Section 6
8 minUrban Renewal: The Docklands Debate
Listening audio
Tap play to listen. Replay as many times as you need.
Show transcript
Hamish (Scottish, m):Welcome to 'City Talk'. Today we’re looking at the controversial redevelopment of the Old Docklands. With me are Rhys, a local heritage campaigner, and Priya, a representative from the architectural firm behind the project.
Rhys, if I can start with you—you’ve been quite vocal about the scale of the changes.
Rhys (Welsh, m):To say I've been vocal is something of an understatement, Hamish. Looking at the glossy brochures, one might be forgiven for thinking this was a community-led initiative. But let’s be honest, the proposed glass towers are a far cry from the industrial character of the area.
I must warn against the trend of 'sanitising' our history just to accommodate luxury apartments that most locals can't afford.
Priya (RP, f):If I could just jump in there—I think Rhys is perhaps playing down the sheer level of dilapidation the Docklands had fallen into. We aren't talking about a vibrant museum; we're talking about a site that was, frankly, a public safety hazard. Our aim is to breathe life back into it.
The 'glass towers' he mentions actually incorporate solar-harvesting technology that sets a new standard for sustainable urban living.
Rhys (Welsh, m):Sustainable for whom, though? With hindsight, we can see that similar projects in the North have consistently pushed out the existing population. I acknowledge that the site needed work—nobody is disputing that—but does 'work' always have to mean high-rise and high-rent?
I’m genuinely surprised at the lack of imagination in the design phase.
Priya (RP, f):It’s interesting you say that, because we held three public consultations. While I regret that we couldn't satisfy every single dissenting voice, the feedback we received was largely positive regarding the new green spaces. We’ve had to make tough calls.
It’s a delicate balancing act between preservation and progress.
Rhys (Welsh, m):Public consultations? You mean those mid-week afternoon sessions when most people are at work? It felt more like a box-ticking exercise than a genuine attempt to gauge public sentiment.
I’d argue the firm has been remarkably adept at ignoring the elephant in the room: the loss of local soul.
Priya (RP, f):I find that characterisation a bit harsh, Rhys. We’ve committed to including affordable studio spaces for local artists. It’s not just about the bottom line.
However, I suppose I should concede that the communication regarding the construction timeline could have been handled with more transparency. We're working to rectify that.
Rhys (Welsh, m):Well, at least that’s something. But as a strategy, focusing on 'studios' while the actual residents are being priced out seems... well, it’s a drop in the ocean.
I just hope that when the dust settles, we don't look back with even more regret than we do now.
Hamish (Scottish, m):A sobering thought to end on. Priya, Rhys, thank you both for joining us. It seems the debate over the Docklands is far from over.
Priya (RP, f):Thank you. It’s important to have these conversations, even if we don't see eye to eye on the architectural aesthetic.
Rhys (Welsh, m):Indeed. And we'll keep pushing for a result that actually serves the community.
Hamish (Scottish, m):Up next, we’ll be talking to the lead engineer about the logistics of the new bridge...
Question 1.What is Rhys's attitude towards the public consultations mentioned by Priya?
Question 2.During the discussion, what point does Priya concede?
Question 3.How does Priya characterise Rhys's view of the Docklands' prior state?
Question 4.What is Rhys’s main point regarding the new development?
Question 5.What is Rhys’s primary intention in the conversation?
Question 6.Which best describes Priya's stance during the interview?
Visual stimulus · Section 7
3 minThe Listening P4 two-task grid — what your answer sheet actually looks like
Two parallel matching tasks share five speakers. Each task has 8 options; only 5 are used. The unused options are the lexical-overlap traps.
Notes
P4 answer sheet — schematic
- ▸Speakers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (down the page) — same five speakers, both tasks.
- ▸Task 1 options A–H — only 5 are correct (INTENTION).
- ▸Task 2 options A–H — only 5 are correct (MAIN POINT).
- ▸Listen 1: complete ONLY Task 1. Listen 2: complete ONLY Task 2.
- ▸Three unused options per task = lexical-overlap distractors. Don't tick them just because you heard the keyword.
Discuss in pairs
Identify, from the grid, where you'd most likely get distracted on a real sitting — and why.
CAE Listening Part 4 — Multiple Matching
Strategy
- 1.Underline the EIGHT options for Task 1 BEFORE the audio. Don't pre-read Task 2 — it pollutes Task 1.
- 2.First listening: Task 1 ONLY. Tick a tentative answer for every speaker; don't leave gaps.
- 3.Between listenings (~30s): glance at Task 2 options and identify which speaker is likely which.
- 4.Second listening: Task 2 ONLY. Confirm Task 1 only if you hear a clearer signal.
- 5.Trap watch: any option that uses a word the speaker used VERBATIM. The right answer paraphrases the STANCE.
- 6.Never leave a blank. Best guess if necessary; you're not penalised.
Example
Speaker 1 said 'I won't pretend the pay cut wasn't real… but it's worth it.' → INTENTION: justify a decision. MAIN POINT: the cost is real but worth it.
Practice · Section 9
7 minFill in the blank
Question 1.The speaker ____ that the first year was difficult.
Question 2.He ____ the risks, but the figures suggest otherwise.
Question 3.She ____ against romanticising the transition.
Question 4.____ hindsight, she'd have made the change earlier.
Question 5.He expresses surprise ____ how quickly his confidence returned.
Question 6.She regrets ____ the change five years earlier.
Writing · Section 10
4 minPut it in writing
Your task
In 4 minutes, write a 50-word 'stance paragraph' on a decision in your life. Use AT LEAST TWO of today's stance verbs (acknowledges / plays down / warns against / expresses surprise at / regrets / with hindsight).
- • 50 words (±10) — tight.
- • At least two stance verbs.
- • Written in the THIRD person (as if you were the P4 option-writer paraphrasing yourself).
Before you submit
- ☐ Third-person voice ('The speaker acknowledges…').
- ☐ Two stance verbs visibly present.
- ☐ A clear INTENTION + a clear MAIN POINT.
- ☐ No exact-word lexical-overlap traps.
Show model answer
The speaker acknowledges that moving abroad cost her three years of senior progression, but plays down the loss as a fair price for the language and the friendships. With hindsight, she warns against treating a foreign year as a career pause; for her, it was the most generative phase she's had. (50 words)
Make it a real conversation
Speaking — 6 minutes. You are the SIXTH speaker on the 'Why I changed careers' panel. In 90 seconds, deliver a P4-grade monologue: one clear INTENTION + one clear MAIN POINT. Partner/teacher then paraphrases YOU using a stance verb. If they get it right, you've spoken P4-cleanly.
After the partner paraphrases you, decide together: did the paraphrase match your INTENTION, your MAIN POINT, or both?
Was your stance audibly clear in 90 seconds?
Both matched
P4-grade clarity.
Intention matched, main point fuzzy
Add a sharper takeaway sentence.
Main point matched, intention fuzzy
Frame the first 10 seconds more clearly.
Neither
Slow down; lead with the stance, not the story.
Useful phrases
- I won't pretend ______ wasn't real, but ______.
- Look, I'd think very carefully before ______.
- Even I'm surprised that ______.
- People romanticise this — ______ and ______ are two different things.
- With hindsight, ______.
- The thing I regret isn't ______; it's ______.
Optional · Teacher-led
Teacher Activities
Stretches if time allows. All work 1:1. ~18 min total
Homework · Section 12
Take-homeTake it home
Find a short multi-voice podcast or radio segment (3–5 voices on one theme). For each voice, write ONE stance-verb paraphrase. Note any lexical-overlap traps you noticed.
Expand the stance-verb bank to 15 items. Add: claims · concedes · downplays · is sceptical of · is convinced that · is reluctant to · denies that · accepts that · suspects that.
Rewrite 5 direct quotations as third-person stance paraphrases. (a) 'I love it, honestly.' (b) 'I wouldn't recommend it.' (c) 'I can't believe it worked.' (d) 'The pay cut was real.' (e) 'I wish I'd done it sooner.'
Re-watch today's transcripts and write a 120-word reflection: which speaker did you find HARDEST to paraphrase, and why? What did that tell you about your own listening?
Recap · Section 13
Wrap-upWhat you've learned
- P4 is paraphrase practice — the right answer maps STANCE, not vocabulary.
- Stance verbs to learn cold: acknowledges · plays down · warns against · expresses surprise at · regrets · with hindsight.
- Two tasks, two listens: Task 1 (intention) on listen 1; Task 2 (main point) on listen 2.
- The lexical-overlap option is the classic trap. If the option REPEATS the speaker's word, suspect it.
- Never leave a blank.
Lesson complete
Mark this lesson done to save your progress.