【正文】 usually final decisions as to choice of court, size of claim, nature of claim stated, parties, extent and kind of pretrial investigation, mode of trial （whether jury or nonjury）, settlement offers, extent and kind of proofs, style of presentation and argument, and, within limits, speed and vigor of presentation. The trials are largely produced and directed by the lawyers. They supply the actors and the script, through the witnesses called and the testimony elicited by direct and cross examination. Judges are called on to intervene only occasionally and then briefly, to ensure that all the procedural safeguards of due process are met and essential fairness is achieved. They rule on the admissibility of evidence, but this is a negative function of keeping out unreliable evidence rather than an affirmative one of providing the facts upon which a case is determined.譯：在抗辯制下，律師的權(quán)利和義務(wù)范圍廣。律師從開始，通常情況下到最后都能決定選擇哪個法院、索賠的數(shù)額大小、索賠的法律依據(jù)、當事人、庭前調(diào)查的范圍和類型、庭審的模式（有無陪審團）、賠償金、證據(jù)的范圍和類型、陳述和抗辯的風格并在一定限度上控制陳述的語速和情緒（原意為活力）。庭審很大程度上被律師導演和控制節(jié)奏。他們提供演員和劇本，通過直接質(zhì)證和交叉質(zhì)證詢問證人、引出其證詞。法官只會偶爾地、短暫地進行干預以確保所有正當司法程序條款中的程序保障和達到基本的正義。他們對證據(jù)的可采信性進行裁決，但是這是一種消極作用，時候擯棄不可靠的證據(jù)而非提供作為案件依據(jù)的事實。5. The reasons for the prevalence of the adversary system are manifold, but four are certainly among the most important：（1）It is believed that a truer decision will be reached as the result of a contest directed by interested parties. An interested party naturally will be most effective in seeking, discovering, and presenting the materials which will reveal the strength of his own case and the weakness of his adversary39。s case；（2）The parties, who after all are the persons principally interested in the resolution of the controversy, should bear the major burden of the time, energy and costs required；（3）Although impartial investigation may be better when no final decision need be reached, setting up sides makes easier the type of yesorno decision that is thought to be necessary in a lawsuit；（4）Since resort to law has replaced resort to force that characterized primitive ages, the human instinct to do battle is better satisfied by a means of settling disputes that are very much in the hands of the parties.譯：抗辯制盛行的原因有很多方面，但最重要的四個原因如下：（1）我們相信正確的判決是有利害關(guān)系的當事人互相競爭的結(jié)果。一個有利害關(guān)系的當事人將會有效率地尋求、發(fā)現(xiàn)并呈現(xiàn)其準備的材料，這些材料將會為他自己的訴求提供有力支撐并且削弱抗辯對方的訴求。（2）對爭議的解決非常關(guān)心的當事人應(yīng)該對時間的損耗、能力和成本的消耗負主要責任；（3）盡管在不需要作出最終決定的時候不偏不倚的調(diào)查可能更合適，但人們認為訴訟必須對“是與否”的問題作出決定，而樹立對立面是這種決定更為簡單。（4）因此求助于法律代替了原始時期的求助于武力，人類戰(zhàn)斗的本能被解決爭端所滿足,這十分符合雙方當事人的意愿。6. Contrasted with the methods of scientific or historical research, this system of finding answers to legal controversies seems sometimes unsatisfactory. When one reflects on the fact that under the adversary system victory often turns on factors other than the true merits of the case, there is reason to be skeptical about of the adversary system point out that it tends to reduce litigation to a costly game, in which the lawyers bee the principal players and the oute will turn on their skills rather than the justice or true merits of the case. In recent times there has been a trend toward increasing the affirmative or active functions of the court that reflects the larger trend away from the sporting or game theory of litigation. Nonetheless, it cannot be questioned that in the United States the primary responsibility and control over almost all phases of the judicial process continue to reside in the parties. Full understanding of the American legal procedure will require our constant attention to the existence of the adversary system as well as critical analysis of its shortings.譯：與科學和歷史研究方法形成鮮明對照，這種法律爭端解決的系統(tǒng)似乎不太盡如人意?？罐q制下勝訴往往不取決于案件本身的實體問題而取決于其他因素，想到這點，人們便更有理由對這種是非選擇作出最終結(jié)論。抗辯制的批判者指出，抗辯制趨向于將訴訟變成昂貴的游戲而使訴訟減少，律師將成為訴訟最重要的角色，訴訟的結(jié)果取決于律師的經(jīng)驗技巧而非爭議和案件涉及的實體問題。近來，法院出現(xiàn)了越來越多值得肯定與積極的機制，反映出博弈論這種訴訟理論發(fā)展起來的大趨勢。盡管如此，不可否認在美國，司法程序中幾乎所有的首要責任和控制權(quán)都歸屬于當事人。全方位地理解美國司法程序?qū)粩嗵嵝盐覀冏⒁饪罐q制的存在和其批判學說的不足。7. There is but one test of a good system of procedure：Does it tend to the just and efficient determination of legal this connection we must understand one thing： Despite the fact that this unit is only an introduction to the American legal system, we are not to assume that our function here is simply to digest uncritically what we learn from this unit. It is a part of our learning process to examine, to wash in cynical acid, each rule, each form, each principle we learn. But while doing so； keep in mind that many, diverse, and plex are the aspects of both justice and 譯：有且僅有一個測試一個程序體制是否良好的標準：它是否能公正和有效地判定法律糾紛。在這一點上我們必須明白一件事：盡管事實上這個單元我們介紹是對美國法律體系的介紹，我們不能假設(shè)我們的功能只是簡單的、不鑒別和批判地吸收我們從本課學到的內(nèi)容。對我們所學的每一條規(guī)則、每一種方式和每一個原則進行審視，進行“冷峻的酸處理”，這本就是學習過程的一部分。但當我們這樣做的同時，要記住公平與正義的面貌都是多樣和復雜的。寧可累死在路上，也不能閑死在家里！寧可去碰壁，也不能面壁。是狼就要練好牙，是羊就要練好腿。什么是奮斗？奮斗就是每天很難，可一年一年卻越來越容易。不奮斗就是每天都很容易，可一年一年越來越難。能干的人，不在情緒上計較，只在做事上認真；無能的人！不在做事上認真，只在情緒上計較。拼一個春夏秋冬！贏一個無悔人生！早安！—————獻給所有努力的人.學習參