对抗制是英美法系法庭辩护制度
对抗制：
（1）对抗的双方：
A——民事案件中的原告，刑事案件中的公诉人；
B——被告律师； 
（2）对抗的方式：
提出各自的证据；询问己方证人；盘问对方证人；相互辩论；
（3）法官的角——不主动调查，消极的仲裁人
A——主持开庭；
B——对双方的动议和异议做出裁决；
纠问制是大陆法系的审判制度，他是由法官承担主导角，控制审判进程，提出问题，对事实做出判断。
对抗制与纠问制的区别
1. 是不同法系的法庭辩护制度
2. 产生的历史时期和社会背景不同。纠问式诉讼是君主专制的产物；而对抗式诉讼则是奴隶制民主共和和封建制初期的产物。
3. 法官的职能不同。
4. 被告人的法律地位不同。在纠问式诉讼中，被告人只是诉讼的客体，只能被迫究，被处罚，没有任何诉讼地位；而在对抗制诉讼中，双方当事人地位平等，各自都有控辩的权利。
5. 审讯的形式不同。纠问制诉讼是采取秘密的，刑讯逼供合法化；而对抗制诉讼则是实行审判公开、“不告不理’的诉讼原则。
The adversary system is a common law court defense system
adversarial system：
defendant
(1) against the two sides:
A- plaintiff in A civil case, the prosecutor in criminal cases;
B - the defendant lawyer;
(2) against the way:
Put forward their own evidence; Question their own witnesses; Ask each other the witness; The debate each other;
(3) the role of a judge, not active investigation, negative referee
A - chaired the hearing;
B - to make a decision on both sides of the motion and dissent;
Inquisitorial system
It is the judgment of the civil law system, and he is borne by the judge dominant role, control trial process, ask questions, to judge the fact.
The difference between the adversarial system and the inquisitorial system
1. They are different genealogy of law of the court system of advocacy.
2. The result in different historical periods and social background. Inquisitorial system is the product of the absolute monarchy; adversarial system is the product of a slavery democratic republic and the beginning of the feudal system.
3. The function of the judge is different.
4. The legal status of the defendant is different. In the inquisitorial system, the defendant is the object of litigation, were forced to investigate, be punished, no litigation status; And in the adversarial system, the parties have equal status, each have the rights of the defendant.
5. Different form of the hearing. The secrets of inquisitorial litigation system was taken, legalized torture; The adversarial system lawsuit is a public trial, "not to ignore 'principles of litigation.