I am specifically refering to aspiration in a university debate context. I have come accross many potential debaters who have the thinking ability to dissect issues, counter proposals and follow the conventions of parliamentary debate to the tee. However, after seeing them perform for a year or two, the only sharpening that they were able to do were essentially the issues I mentioned earlier (dissect issues, etc) which were before thought to be enough or event a marquee set of skills. However, as all structures, the foundation needs to be solid for the it to sufficient.
The foundation, simple though it may be, is still language. Good language plus all the debating skills and know how would make you a much better debater. The problem that debaters are facing are the arrogance or the ignorance that language also needs to be learned, terms acquired if needs be and of course practiced. Unfortunately, we have no room for language in our debate trainings and hence, at least in Malaysia, our debaters will come up short against the best in the world who have the neccessary language skills like the Aussies, the Brits and the Americans.