Please, people who know much about the English language..

[uss]

I'll try to be brief since I'll have to go back to school in 10 minutes.

In our English lessons, we have word tests. This is probably done everywhere, but our English word tests with this teacher actually contain sentences and longer expressions.

I got my word test results just today. The grade was 3=(two minuses) in the Estonian scale of 1-5. 2 is the smallest grade you can get for a test that you have done, and thus, 2 is the equivalent of F, so 3= means that I was very close to getting one!

What I wanted to talk about were the flaws in it.

First, how correct is it to write 'To watch in amazement to march them into the mist?' I wrote 'To watch them march into the mist in amazement,' which she said was very wrong.

Expression nr. 29, I wrote 'To work on a memorial.' The correct one was 'To start work on the memorial.' I asked about that one, assuming both 'a' and 'the' should apply. She said "You see, if you start working on a memorial, you *know* what memorial you are working on."

OK, then I asked about Nr. 25. I wrote 'To disappear into a wayside inn.' The correct way to write it was 'To disappear into the wayside inn.' She said "Well, usually there isn't more than one inn in a countryside." "But there CAN be more than one," I replied. "Don't start arguing." Grr!

Then I asked about Nr. 20. The sentence was 'To carve a giant sculpture into a mountain' and I wrote it correctly. I asked why that one was correct. She said "It's an exception." I asked how, to which she said "Understand, I took these expressions from the English book. Go ask an Englishman, if you really want to know!"

So here I am. This is crazy! I always get 3's on my English word tests, but 5's(A's) on my English Unit Tests. I'd really like to know which one of us is the idiot. She has been an English teacher for more than 10 years, but what she thinks seems so.. incorrect. My stupidity or her senility?

It's about the British English which very few people use. i don't know close to anything about that, since I mostly learnt the English language by watching American TV shows, so she *could* be right.


So, who is right?

Thanks.

[The Hierophant]

Your answers were NOT wrong, they were just more vague in their identification of the sentence's object. You use the indefinite article 'a' instead of the definite 'the'. But your answers still make sense by basic English language conventions, so you shouldn't have been marked down.
However, if the excercise was to write the sentences using the definite article then you would have been wrong. Was that in fact the case?

ps: in New Zealand we officially recognise 'British' English conventions over 'American'.

[ 04-19-2004, 06:02 AM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]

[drew_jarvie]

Hi, ill try to go through them point by point.

Originally posted by uss: First, how correct is it to write 'To watch in amazement to march them into the mist?' I wrote 'To watch them march into the mist in amazement,' which she said was very wrong. [/QB]

Um.. well strictly speaking, neither of you are correct.

'To watch in amazement to march them into the mist?' - this one just isn’t good English

'To watch them march into the mist in amazement,' – this one is right, but the way you have formed the sentence imples that the people walking into the mist are amazed, not the person looking at them. If you get what I mean.

Perhaps better would be:

‘To watch in amazement as they march into the mist’.

Originally posted by uss: Expression nr. 29, I wrote 'To work on a memorial.' The correct one was 'To start work on the memorial.' I asked about that one, assuming both 'a' and 'the' should apply. She said "You see, if you start working on a memorial, you *know* what memorial you are working on." [/QB]

She is probably right here, because to say that you are going to work (and NOT about to start one) implies that there is one that you are working on, and so can be called ‘the’. The way you said it, it sounds like you are about to start afresh on a new memorial, or to pick one at random and just work on it.

Originally posted by uss: OK, then I asked about Nr. 25. I wrote 'To disappear into a wayside inn.' The correct way to write it was 'To disappear into the wayside inn.' She said "Well, usually there isn't more than one inn in a countryside." "But there CAN be more than one," I replied. "Don't start arguing." Grr! [/QB]

I would say you are 100% correct here and she is slightly incorrect J

To say what you said implies that you do not know the name of the inn and that is correct, because if you did know its name you would state it.

She is wrong because, as you say, there could be more than one. And without extensive knowledge of the area surrounding you, you would not know if there was an inn near or not. If you did have this knowledge, as I have said before, then you would probably name the inn by its proper name.

Originally posted by uss: Then I asked about Nr. 20. The sentence was 'To carve a giant sculpture into a mountain' and I wrote it correctly. I asked why that one was correct. She said "It's an exception." I asked how, to which she said "Understand, I took these expressions from the English book. Go ask an Englishman, if you really want to know!" [/QB]

Well yes, she is sorta right here… but then it depends on the situation you use these sentences in as are all the sentences you have here.

I would need to know the situation here to find a right answer but:

To say: 'To carve a giant sculpture into a mountain' probably would apply to you if you were no-where near mountains and were taking a vow to go to a mountainous area and carve something, or just to pick a mountain at random; like you have no prefence which one. Like what you are doing is more important than the mountain you pick.

To say: 'To carve a giant sculpture into the mountain' implies that there is a specific mountain that you want to carve into, almost as if the mountain is more important thatn what you are doing to it, in this case sculpting.


Overall, and I think many other will agree, this test is not a very well formed one, and if they are just giving you sentences picked from a book without telling you the situation it is in, there can be many answers, and I feel you have a right to feel angry.


Drew

[promethius9594]

heh, drew is pretty much on the ball with his assessment. English is a shoddy language to have to learn if you havent grown up using it.

[Stratos]

English- Easy to learn, impossible to master.

[Harkoliar]

amen stratos

[uss]

Thanks a lot for the replies, folks!

Hierophant, does the Definite Article mean that there is a specific object and thus, the 'the' article is used? Then why was 'To carve a giant sculpture into a mountain' correct?

Hmm, drew_jarvie, are you sure that 'To watch in amazement to march them into the mist' isn't correct English at all? It does seem very incorrect to me, but she speaks as if she's 100% sure that it is correct. Curious.

Heh yeah, I admit that 'To watch them march into the mist in amazement' is slightly flawed.

This is really annoying as it has been since this teacher started teaching us. Others don't seem to have any problems with it, since they study for English word tests, but the thought of studying English isn't appealing, as I already come to IWF, play English games, watch English TV shows, etc.

Even though I always get the more important(Unit) Tests A's, and I have mostly got the first rank in every year in-school contests for advanced English speakers, I still have trouble with the word tests. It's all because there are so many different ways to express the same meaning, and my teacher doesn't seem to understand that.

I might send my whole test and my flaws here soon, if I become bored.

You're damn right, Stratos! My sister went to the Tallinn English College, and you wouldn't believe the rules proper English has, including the fact that 'Don't let's go to the cinema' is correct.

[Bungleau]

Uss,

I have to qualify by saying I speak American, not English...

First thing I'll note is that these seem to be mostly sentence fragments, and not full sentences. The full sentence can often give you more information about what's being discussed.

That being said, it appears that the distinction you're being tested on is whether to use "a" or "the" as a qualifier. Is that correct?

Assuming it is....

Originally posted by uss: First, how correct is it to write 'To watch in amazement to march them into the mist?' I wrote 'To watch them march into the mist in amazement,' which she said was very wrong.

Both of these should be shot, as has been pointed out. And this is where sentence fragments come into play.

"To watch them march into the mist in amazement" says that those doing the marching are the ones in amazement. "To watch them in amazement as they march into the mist" says that the watcher is in amazement. I'd probably write "In amazement, I watch them march into the mist". Any one can be correct, depending on the context of the sentence, which isn't given here.

Expression nr. 29, I wrote 'To work on a memorial.' The correct one was 'To start work on the memorial.' I asked about that one, assuming both 'a' and 'the' should apply. She said "You see, if you start working on a memorial, you *know* what memorial you are working on."

"To start work on the memorial" implies that the exact type of memorial has already been decided, and that it's ready to go. "To start work on a memorial" implies that a memorial is planned, but the exact type (style, form, etc.) hasn't been completely identified.

I think either one is pretty much correct, though. "The" memorial also implies that there are no other memorials, which may or may not be correct. It's all about context, and I can pretty much guarantee you that no one you talk to on the street will quibble about this one.

OK, then I asked about Nr. 25. I wrote 'To disappear into a wayside inn.' The correct way to write it was 'To disappear into the wayside inn.' She said "Well, usually there isn't more than one inn in a countryside." "But there CAN be more than one," I replied. "Don't start arguing." Grr!

Again, either one is correct. Context determines the correct answer. "A wayside inn" means any available inn, wherever it may be. "The wayside inn" implies a specific one, and that there isn't any other one which may be in question. I'm with you on this one.

Then I asked about Nr. 20. The sentence was 'To carve a giant sculpture into a mountain' and I wrote it correctly. I asked why that one was correct. She said "It's an exception." I asked how, to which she said "Understand, I took these expressions from the English book. Go ask an Englishman, if you really want to know!"

That fragment (again, it's not a sentence!) talks about carving a sculpture (any sculpture) into a mountain (again, any mountain). The context determines what the right answer is; for example, in a town I drove through in Texas, there is one and only one thing which could be called a mountain. If you talked about carving into a mountain there, they might ask where you were planning on carving -- here, in *the* mountain, or in some other mountain.

So here I am. This is crazy! I always get 3's on my English word tests, but 5's(A's) on my English Unit Tests. I'd really like to know which one of us is the idiot. She has been an English teacher for more than 10 years, but what she thinks seems so.. incorrect. My stupidity or her senility?

Senility? I'd hate to think that sets in during one's mid-30s, where I anticipate this teacher is. Stupidity? I think not, since you're in class to learn. I suspect it's different perspectives...

It's about the British English which very few people use. i don't know close to anything about that, since I mostly learnt the English language by watching American TV shows, so she *could* be right. So, who is right? Thanks.

See my earlier comment about speaking American [img]smile.gif[/img]

But across the board, there are no right or wrong answers, based on what you've indicated here. There are only shades of meaning and interpretation. If there's additional material that clarifies the question, you may have to toss out everything I've written.

I don't know your teacher well enough to make any comments. There may be more information that could qualify all this.

Good luck in pleading your case.

[Donut]

Perhaps the inn was called "The Wayside Inn"

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Donut: Perhaps the inn was called "The Wayside Inn"

If it was, the outcome would be a different, right? Usually it is the speaker's mind which dictates whether you use the definite articles. Depending on the speaker's point-of-view "Let's go to a restaurant" and "Let's go to the restaurant" could be equally correct.

Regarding the "carve a face in a mountain" -- your teacher is correct that it is written correctly, unless you have a particular mountain in mind, that is. However, your teacher cites an "exception" to the rule. This is made up. It's BS. There aren't really "exceptions" to the rule, there are only differing applications of the rule to a particular situation. This is what those of us who have been teachers call "backpedalling" or "making stuff up" -- we do that when a bright student corners us.