Should Ss be penalised for language errors in answers to Reading Comprehension questions

A former Master's degree student emailled me with a question that is posed to me from time to time by former education students and teachers. In brief, the question is: 

In a Reading Comprehension test, if students' written answers to short/long questions contain language errors, should students be penalised even if the errors do not interfere with the meaning? 

MY  RESPONSE: 

 You've brought up a tricky question which lends itself to two contrasting perspectives: (a) 'focus on meaning' vs (b) 'focus on meaning AND language form.' Adherents to (b) usually contend that this will ensure that students build up  the habit of attending to correct language forms all the time. 

Adherents to (a) emphasize the purpose of the language/communication event. For example, in a Reading Comprehension test, the purpose is to assess students' understanding of the reading text in question. Hence, as long as their answers to short/long questions clearly show their understanding, other language form errors that do not affect the meaning of their answers should not matter. 

Both perspectives are valid, especially in the context of school education. I would like to cite, in conclusion, my experience in public exam assessments (e.g., TSA; LPAT). In the Reading Comprehension section, a student's answer to a short/long question is mainly assessed on its correctness in MEANING. Errors that do not interfere with the correct meaning will not be taken into account. 

My personal opinion: for a school's internal test/exam, if teachers also want to look for 100% correct language form in the written answer, they might consider specifying that in the Reading Comprehension instruction (e.g., 'Marks will be deducted for ...'). Otherwise, just focus on the meaning. 

Just my two cents. 

Regards

Paul Sze

"I used NotebookLM wrong ..."

 Just found another excellent example for my upcoming Language Awareness course. 

The conventional textbook/teacher explanation would be:  

"- We use an adverb of manner to describe how the action represented by the verb phrase happens. 

- We form an adverb of manner by adding '-ly' to the adjective; hence 'wrong (adj.) > wrongly (adv,). 

Under a language awareness approach, a possible lesson sequence (for post-intermediate learners) would be: 

============

Step 1: Show Ss the example below ( "I used NotebookLM wrong"); ask Ss if they notice anything 'unusual' about the sentence. 

Step 2: Show the following 2 sentences. Invite Ss to judge which one(s) is/are acceptable: (a) He did it wrongly; (b) He did it wrong. 

Step 3: Present other example sentences (e.g., He ran fast; She arrived at school late; They worked hard), and ask learners to decide whether the last word in each sentence is an adverb. Sum up by guiding learners to see that not all adverbs end in -ly. (Introduce the term 'flat adverb' if necessary.)

Step 4: Invite learners to come up with similar example sentences. If necessary, provide them with such adverbs (e.g., right; high; far)

Step 5: With advanced learners, challenge them by asking them to look for the subtle difference in meaning between (a) He did it wrong, and (b) He did it wrongly. 

Step 6: Finish by inviting Ss to share their thoughts on the slogan used by Cityplaza: 'LIVE HAPPY.'

=================

In fact, with the advent of AI, students can learn a lot about language matters from chatbots. It's really time we stopped relying totally on abstract, unreliable, 'rules' in our grammar teaching. 

"We hope you enjoy!"

 Today, I can totally accept 'Enjoy!' when it is used to end an informal message. But I admit when I saw the sentence "We hope you enjoy!", I still found it slightly odd. On second thought, though, if "Enjoy!" as an intransitive verb is universally acceptable today, why not 'We hope you enjoy!"!

I first learnt 'enjoy' as a transitive verb while in primary school, hence 'enjoy oneself', 'enjoy (doing) something', etc. In the next few decades, 'enjoy' continued to be used as a transitive verb. Then, starting about 20 (?) years ago, the intransitive usage started to surface, hence 'Enjoy!' at the end of an informal message.

A moment ago, my mind was caught by this question: "Exactly when did the intransitive usage of 'enjoy' begin?" So I went to Perplexity and asked the question, and was amazed at the answer. "Enjoy" actually started out as an intransitive verb in the 14th century (meaning 'Rejoice', 'Be happy', etc.)! It transitioned to transitive use by the mid-15th century. Then the intransitive usage revived in the late 20th century.

Language is changing and developing all the time. And that's one reason why it is so fascinating.

Another example that highlights the importance of teacher language awareness

 Which question tag is 'correct'? 

(A) He has a lot of friends, hasn't he? 

(B) He has a lot of friends, doesn't he? 

Being an old-fashioned guy, I've been saying (A) for years. But in a recent lesson observation, the teacher said (A) was wrong. Have I been saying it wrong all these years? 

So after the visit, I looked up the issue on the Internet. In the language discussion forums, as usual, there are self-professed authorities who cite grammar rules to prove why (A) is 'wrong': "'Has' is a lexical verb, not an auxiliary verb, in the sentence; hence the correct verb in the tag is 'doesn't'. 

Luckily, there are also folks who point out that both are fine. 

Then, out of curiosity, I turned to ChatGPT. And, like my previous ChatGPT experience, it gave me a traditional, didactic, answer, like the one meted out by the language experts in the online discussion forums. 

Hence, my two cents for language teachers: 

1. When it comes to investigating the 'correctness' of a grammar item, don't trust ChatGPT. 

2. There are many instances of real-life language use which do not abide by grammar rules. Think of grammar rules as attempts to deduce general patterns about the language only, as there WILL be many instances which do not comply with the 'rules'. Hence, teacher language awareness is important. 

Finally, if you're about to teach '-ed adjectives' vs '-ing adjectives' ('I feel bored' because 'Paul is boring'), how would you deal with the expression "I feel amazing!"? 

When there is a fire, ...

 

Hong Kong is probably the only city in the world which   says "When there is a fire,...". Not that it's grammatically wrong, but it's kind of pessimistic, isn't it? It's like "Sooner or later, there will be a fire. And 'when there is a fire, .....'."  (Other cities say "If ...", "In case of...", "In the event of ...", ....

"Type 3 conditional sentence"

Is this conditional sentence wrong? 

"If Jane had asked me, I would give her some money."

Glad to run into this example by Roger Berry in his 2021 book "Doing English Grammar : Theory, Description and Practice."

Berry was citing the above example from a test for teachers. The 'correct' answer, according to the test, and as you can guess, was: "If Jane had asked me, I would have given her some money." 

The so-called Type 3 Conditional Sentence!

Of course, depending on the context, and the speaker's intended meaning, "If Jane had asked me, I would give her some money" can be 'correct'!

Berry then used the term "the long-discredited three- or four-conditional approach" to describe the over-simplified and rigid classification of conditional sentences often promulgated in ESL textbooks. That totally resonates with me. 

Again, this highlights the importance of teacher language awareness. 

Pyrotechnics show

 I went to the West Kowloon Park last night to watch the 水上煙火表演. Well, I admit I had had no idea what to call 水上煙火表演  in English, so I had to look it up in the mass media. 

The answer is: "a pyrotechnics show". 

OK, but this being quite a technical word, it's not easy to remember (unlike "firework(s) display"). Given the rising frequency of 煙火表演 in HK, I hope a more popular, easier-to-remember, name will evolve soon.  

Incidentally, I enjoy the traditional fireworks display more than the pyrotechnics show. 

Three problems in just one short paragraph

 

How do you pronounce the bookstore name 'Eslite'?

 I admit I still have no idea how to say the bookstore name "Eslite." The bookstore"s homepage says the name originated from the French word "elite", but does not tell how it should be pronounced. Then, should the second syllable be pronounced as "leet", as with "elite", or should it be pronounced like the English "lite"？

What ChatGPT thinks about the expression 'I feel amazing'

 This is the first time that ChatGPT has somewhat disappointed me with its answer to my language question. I asked it whether it's OK to say 'I feel amazing.' Below is its answer. (Traditional grammar would distinguish between 'The story is amazing/interesting/exciting' and 'I feel amazed/interested/excited.')

All that ChatGPT needs to say is something like 'In recent years, people have started to say "I feel amazing" to mean "I feel great/good/fantastic."

We still need humans when it comes to language awareness.

More and more verbs being used ergatively

 Just ran into an example illustrating the trend for people to use certain verbs ergatively. A few years ago, one would say 'Work you create IS SAVED to ....'; today, it is 'Work you created SAVES to ...'  (You can find many other examples in ICT jargon.)

Another example: More than 10 years ago, Amazon would tell you that 'your order has been shipped.' Today, it's always 'Your order has shipped.'

This is one thing for ESL teachers to watch out for when teaching the Passive Voice. 

What should we beware of?

 Yes, fruit drops can be dangerous. But seeds?

星加坡 vs 新加坡

 剛才電視新聞報導新加坡旅遊業復甦，字幕是「新加坡」，但報導員由始至終都是讀「星加坡」。

香港人習慣說「星加坡」，但Singapore 正式的中文國名是「新加坡」，不知要再過多久，香港人才會改口說「新加坡」。

至於我，說formal speech 時說新加坡，說informal speech 時說星加坡。

(至於為甚麼「加」讀做「架」，要請教研究方言的歷史學家了。).

「灣」vs「環」

 前天談到小時候，香港人用第四聲說「銅鑼灣」的「灣」(音環)，到後來才變為用第一聲(音彎)，當時還舉了另一個「灣」讀「環」的例：長沙灣。

今天又想到另一個例：土瓜灣。

如果有三個例存在，這「灣」讀「環」應該不是巧合，問題只是甚麼原因有這變調。.

No Hawking vs No Hawkering

 "No hawkering", or "No hawking"?

Strictly speaking, they should say 'No hawking'. The word 'hawking' already exists in English: Hawking is what hawkers do, just like busking (not 'buskering') is what buskers do; teaching (not 'teachering') is what teachers do; painting (not 'paintering') is what painters do ...

But on second thought, 'hawkering' is not necessarily wrong. It can refer to people who like to play hawker once in while - as amateur hawkers. Just this morning, I saw an English-speaking girl gleefully buskering in Citygate Town Square under the supervision of her mum. She was doing a Chinese dance; no one put money in her box; she didn't mind, as she was simply having fun buskering, she was not really busking). 

BTW, I googled 'No hawkering'. The expression IS used in Malaysia and Singapore. 

AI and teachers' role in the 21 century

https://news.mingpao.com/pns/%E5%89%AF%E5%88%8A/article/20230226/s00005/1677346276815/%7b%E5%89%B5%E7%A7%91%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E9%81%94%E4%BA%BA%7d%E6%9C%B1%E5%AD%90%E7%A9%8E-%E5%B0%8F%E6%99%82%E6%8B%86%E9%9B%BB%E5%99%A8-%E9%95%B7%E5%A4%A7%E9%91%BD%E7%A0%94%E7%A7%91%E6%8A%80-%E6%93%81%E6%8A%B1chatgpt%E8%BF%8E%E6%95%99%E5%AD%B8%E6%96%B0%E4%B8%96%E7%B4%80?fbclid=IwAR1piqCkLcTWguyo_9k7nbZP2Le_4AH-8ClKE443sQGGR9qn6f6Fsk3DxgI

朱子穎校長說得對，人工智能不會淘汰老師，但如果教學，或利用AI  於教學上，仍停留於純知識(其實很多時甚至不是知識而只是information)的單向傳授，那就很沒意思了。21世紀的教師，更要思考如何增强a guide on the side的角色，而不是繼續做the sage on the stage。

這亦是為什麼今天當我看見一些教師教grammar時，仍停留在單向解釋那些其實不可靠的grammar rules，然後期望學生「學會」時，我那麼大感觸。

https://www.facebook.com/paulsze/posts/pfbid02bHbyXhc4PBdJjdSFLHY8hYnTxtM2fEXNzWnhrqVpLaUpZ7wB6oJtjm7VrJE9Meptl

How do you pronounce 'refresh' as a noun?

My occupational habit (or disease) at work:

Yesterday when I saw this poster in an Ikea store, I did not ask myself whether I needed a refresh or not. Instead, I started to wonder: "When 'refresh' is used as a noun, how should it be pronounced?"

"Should we continue to put the stress on the second syllable, like we do when we use 'review', 'report', and 'retreat' as a noun? Or should we put the stress on the first syllable instead, like we do when we use 'recap', 'recount', and 'refund' as a noun?"

When I got home, I immediately looked up a few online dictionaries to find out the answer, but to no avail. I continued to google something like 'how do you pronounce refresh when it is used as a noun', and finally found one answer:

https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/the-noun-for/refresh.html

To my amusement, this answer confirmed what I had suspected: Put the stress on the first syllable when 'refresh' is used as a noun.

But still, can I count on just one answer from the Internet?

to accustom someone to do something?

 

These two slogans from the Agriculture, Fisheries, and Conservation Department are using the verb 'accustom' (1) in the Active Voice, and (2) in the structure 'to accustom someone to do something'. 

This reminds me of another usage error which was once quite common in Hong Kong: 'to look forward to do something', as in 'I look forward to see you soon.' This error is less common now. But most of the time, teachers simply tell students that after 'look forward to', they have to use the -ING form, as if it is just an arbitrary case. 

But there is also semantics behind. We look forward to something, and that's why the -ING form is used if what we look forward to is represented by a verb phrase. Similarly, we do not accustom someone to do something. The semantics behind is that 'we accustom someone to something', which is often expressed in the Passive Voice. 

Travel safe vs Travel safely

 Every time when I'm standing on an MTR escalator, I keep being bombarded by the announcement 'Stand firm, hold the handrail, and travel safely.'

Now, because I've been contemplating whether I should think big, start small, work smarter and not harder, and eat healthy, so that I can live simple but happy, I can't help starting to 'feel' that it's perhaps 'more correct', or 'better', for MTR to say 'Travel safe.' I'm even starting to form a visual representation in my mind of someone who travels safe as opposed to someone who travels safely (though I can't verbalise the difference). 

But what if an ESL teacher confronts me with the question: "Shouldn't we use an adverb after a verb?"

Language polls on www.usingenglish.com

 Just came across an interesting website where people can cast their votes on disputable English language usage issues. For example: 

A. 'I wouldn't have done it if I were you.'

B. 'I wouldn't have done it if I had been you.'

C. Both are acceptable. 

Here's another one: 

A. 'He's better than I.'

B. 'He's better than I am.'

C. 'He's better than me.'

D. Any of these can be used. 

After you have cast your vote, the overall result will show up immediately. In many cases, you will be surprised at how divided people are with their views. 

The website contains hundreds of such language polls. I'm going to include this website as a learning resource in my Language Awareness course next year. 

https://www.usingenglish.com/poll/