Ok,
So you are going to want a general walk-through for the essay. You know this already. There is no way around the fact that it is a BIG essay. Remember, if you follow the timings I have outlined in an earlier post, you should have between 60-65 minutes to write it.
THE QUESTION WILL PROBABLY ASK YOU HOW THE CONVENTIONS OF THE GENRE, OR ANOTHER RELATED ASPECT OF THE GENRE, HAVE CHANGED OVER TIME. WHATEVER IT ASKS YOU, YOU MUST ANSWER THE QUESTION DIRECTLY AND SIGNPOST YOUR ARGUMENT BACK TO THE QUESTION IN EACH PARAGRAPH.
Got it? Sorry if that looked a bit shouty, but it's pretty much the most important thing on the exam so take note.
So...make sure you do the following things:
1. Read the blurbs for each texts and highlight any key words that will give you clues about the content of the text. Often, you will see clues to do with the class, social position, age of writers etc.
2. Aim to find SIX key points in each text which directly answer the question. ie, if the question asks you to talk about how the conventions of the genre have changed, then aim to find around SIX conventions per text. Alternatively, if the question asks you something like 'how have attitudes towards love changed over time? Find points which mostly answer this question. And so on.
3. Write your paragraph clearly with a focused TOPIC SENTENCE, back them up with bits of EVIDENCE and use TERMS to discuss the KEY WORDS of PRAGMATIC SIGNIFICANCE. Remember, don't classify EVERY word, just the ones which carry meaning or are the most important.
4. If you come across KEY LANGUAGE TERMS, point them out as a 'by the way' sort of point. Don't just look out for grammatical stuff...comment on words which are archaic, or have changed meaning too.
5. Write your paragraphs QUICKLY and CONCISELY - you will need to get through a lot of them.
6. Write your six PGs on text A, then 6 on B, then 6 on C.
7. Ensure, in the majority of your paragraphs, that you make a comparison with one of the other texts.
8. STICK TO YOUR TIMINGS!!! YOU MUST COVER EACH TEXT EQUALLY!!! If you get a third of the way through your time and you have only done 4 PGs, MOVE ON!! Don't carry on with Text A forever, as your essay will be weak.
9. Remember, your paragraphs can differ in length. Some may be longer (but not too long), and some may only be short.
10. WRITE LIKE YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT. It is a long essay....there is no avoiding that...so write FAST. Write FASTER THAN YOU EVER HAVE BEFORE. WRITE UNTIL YOUR HAND ACHES. It will be worth it!
Do all the above, and you'll be fine.
Nick
Monday, 16 March 2020
2A - Specific change terms
Don't freak out about these - just revise them!
You should also be able to identify examples of these phenomena in any historical texts you are presented with, and mention them as they crop up. This does not mean that you should write entire paragraphs about them, just that, if you see an example of pejoration, say this...
"The noun 'shambles', which has gone through a process of pejoration over time, is used here to express an attitude that the organisation of the kitchen is chaotic.'
See...so the pejoration bit is not the main point, it is just mention as a 'by the way'.
Language Change Terms
Semantic change/ semantic shift - an umbrella term for where any word or phrase has changed its meaning over time.
Example - 'Gay' used to mean 'happy', but now means 'homosexual'
Pejoration - A process where a word takes on a more negative meaning over time.
Example - 'Silly' used to mean 'happy', but now means 'idiotic'.
Amelioration - The word has become more positive in meaning over time.
Example - 'Brilliant' used to means 'bright', but now means 'extremely good or impressive'
Weakening - A word means the same thing but has lost impact over time.
Example - 'Awesome' used to mean 'beyond comprehension'. Now it is just a throw-away colloquialism for 'good'.
Narrowing - A word that used to refer to a variety of things now only refers to something far more specific.
Example - The word 'fowl' used to be a direct synonym for all species of birds. Now, it refers to a specific group of birds commonly used in cuisine such as hens, geese and ducks.
Broadening - A word which used to be very specific now refers to a much wider spectrum of things.
Example - The word 'desktop' used to mean 'the top of a desk'. It still means that now, but also the visual display on a computer screen.
Borrowing - A word which is clearly adopted from another language or culture.
Example - 'Pyjamas', 'Croissant', 'Boomerang', 'Tepee', 'Kindergarten'.
Neologism - A brand new word made up because there was not a suitable one already in existence
Compound - 'Lawn + mower = Lawnmower', 'Flower + pot = flowerpot'
Blend - 'Britain + Exit = Brexit', 'John + Edward = Jedward'
Clipping - 'Television' becomes 'telly', 'Telephone' becomes 'phone', 'perambulator' becomes 'pram'
Initialism - an abbreviation which is not said as an individual word - Like: FBI, DVD, BBC
Acronym - Where the abbreviation is said as a word - Like: Ofsted, Nato, Fifa
You should also be able to identify examples of these phenomena in any historical texts you are presented with, and mention them as they crop up. This does not mean that you should write entire paragraphs about them, just that, if you see an example of pejoration, say this...
"The noun 'shambles', which has gone through a process of pejoration over time, is used here to express an attitude that the organisation of the kitchen is chaotic.'
See...so the pejoration bit is not the main point, it is just mention as a 'by the way'.
Language Change Terms
Semantic change/ semantic shift - an umbrella term for where any word or phrase has changed its meaning over time.
Example - 'Gay' used to mean 'happy', but now means 'homosexual'
Pejoration - A process where a word takes on a more negative meaning over time.
Example - 'Silly' used to mean 'happy', but now means 'idiotic'.
Amelioration - The word has become more positive in meaning over time.
Example - 'Brilliant' used to means 'bright', but now means 'extremely good or impressive'
Weakening - A word means the same thing but has lost impact over time.
Example - 'Awesome' used to mean 'beyond comprehension'. Now it is just a throw-away colloquialism for 'good'.
Narrowing - A word that used to refer to a variety of things now only refers to something far more specific.
Example - The word 'fowl' used to be a direct synonym for all species of birds. Now, it refers to a specific group of birds commonly used in cuisine such as hens, geese and ducks.
Broadening - A word which used to be very specific now refers to a much wider spectrum of things.
Example - The word 'desktop' used to mean 'the top of a desk'. It still means that now, but also the visual display on a computer screen.
Borrowing - A word which is clearly adopted from another language or culture.
Example - 'Pyjamas', 'Croissant', 'Boomerang', 'Tepee', 'Kindergarten'.
Neologism - A brand new word made up because there was not a suitable one already in existence
Compound - 'Lawn + mower = Lawnmower', 'Flower + pot = flowerpot'
Blend - 'Britain + Exit = Brexit', 'John + Edward = Jedward'
Clipping - 'Television' becomes 'telly', 'Telephone' becomes 'phone', 'perambulator' becomes 'pram'
Initialism - an abbreviation which is not said as an individual word - Like: FBI, DVD, BBC
Acronym - Where the abbreviation is said as a word - Like: Ofsted, Nato, Fifa
2A - Periods of English Language
Below is a diagram outlining the key periods in the history of the English language. Memorise them (this should take around five minutes). Whenever you introduce a text, you should mention in your intro which period of English it dates from.
It is unlikely you will get anything before early modern English, but memorise all of them just to be sure.
It is unlikely you will get anything before early modern English, but memorise all of them just to be sure.
Component 2 - Answering the 20 marker part (d)
Section (d) - Grammar and punctuation - 6-8 marks (The biggest section)
Within this section, the examiner is asking you to find your own examples. 3 examples for a 6 marker or 4 for an 8 marker.
You should NOT be commenting on spelling here, only grammar and punctuation. Clearly, you should NOT be giving any examples that you have already used in previous questions.
Grammar - things to look out for
Unusual syntax,
Verb inflections (if not already tested in earlier question)
Inverted verb/negator
Arbitrary or unusual use of CAPITALS (sometimes used simply to draw attention to an important word - but now not grammatically correct0
Lack of CAPITALS where they should be, like at the start of a proper noun.
Mixed tenses
Verbs which seem to be in the wrong tense.
Punctuation- things to look out for
Lack of apostrophe in contractions (cant, wont)
Apostrophes where we wouldn't expect them (to'night, to'morrow - gone due to standardisation)
Unusual punctuation marks that we do not use
Use of accents above letters to show borrowing or emphasis
Colons or semicolons used instead of full stops (if either is followed by a capital then it is being used as a full-stop)
Non-standard punctuation (!!, !?)
Write your answer like this...
In Line 13, the noun 'Committee' displays non-standard/arbitrary use of capital at the start, probably to show importance of the word.
or
In Line 2 and 7, semi-colons are use instead of full-stops. They are followed by the plural noun 'Tygers' and adverb 'Mostly' which are both capitalised, which is now considered non-standard when following a semi-colon.
Within this section, the examiner is asking you to find your own examples. 3 examples for a 6 marker or 4 for an 8 marker.
You should NOT be commenting on spelling here, only grammar and punctuation. Clearly, you should NOT be giving any examples that you have already used in previous questions.
Grammar - things to look out for
Unusual syntax,
Verb inflections (if not already tested in earlier question)
Inverted verb/negator
Arbitrary or unusual use of CAPITALS (sometimes used simply to draw attention to an important word - but now not grammatically correct0
Lack of CAPITALS where they should be, like at the start of a proper noun.
Mixed tenses
Verbs which seem to be in the wrong tense.
Punctuation- things to look out for
Lack of apostrophe in contractions (cant, wont)
Apostrophes where we wouldn't expect them (to'night, to'morrow - gone due to standardisation)
Unusual punctuation marks that we do not use
Use of accents above letters to show borrowing or emphasis
Colons or semicolons used instead of full stops (if either is followed by a capital then it is being used as a full-stop)
Non-standard punctuation (!!, !?)
Write your answer like this...
In Line 13, the noun 'Committee' displays non-standard/arbitrary use of capital at the start, probably to show importance of the word.
or
In Line 2 and 7, semi-colons are use instead of full-stops. They are followed by the plural noun 'Tygers' and adverb 'Mostly' which are both capitalised, which is now considered non-standard when following a semi-colon.
Component 2 - Answering the 20 marker part (c)
Section (c) - Grammar - 4-6 marks
This is the one where you have to look out for slightly more complex things. You will NOT get any marks here for talking about spelling.
Things that tend to come up which you should look out for:
1. Archaic verb inflections (giveth, haveth, knoweth = third person archaic inflections ---- Givest, havest, knowest = second person archaic inlfections ---- Remember 'th' = third - dead easy to remember)
2. Verb phrases where verb precedes the negator ('know not' instead of 'does not know', 'try not' instead of 'does not try' - for additional security, you should also comment on how in modern times we would also include the auxilliary verb 'do'/'does' which is not present here.
3. Long, multi-clausal sentences which often start with a relative pronoun 'who, which, when', or a conjunction. This has become obsolete since standardisation.
4. Unusual syntax of other types - adverbs and verbs appearing in strange orders etc.
However, we simply don't know what will be tested here. Essentially, they will give you something which is odd or archaic from a grammar perspective, and they want you to use your knowledge and terms to DESCRIBE what is archaic about it.
This is the one where you have to look out for slightly more complex things. You will NOT get any marks here for talking about spelling.
Things that tend to come up which you should look out for:
1. Archaic verb inflections (giveth, haveth, knoweth = third person archaic inflections ---- Givest, havest, knowest = second person archaic inlfections ---- Remember 'th' = third - dead easy to remember)
2. Verb phrases where verb precedes the negator ('know not' instead of 'does not know', 'try not' instead of 'does not try' - for additional security, you should also comment on how in modern times we would also include the auxilliary verb 'do'/'does' which is not present here.
3. Long, multi-clausal sentences which often start with a relative pronoun 'who, which, when', or a conjunction. This has become obsolete since standardisation.
4. Unusual syntax of other types - adverbs and verbs appearing in strange orders etc.
However, we simply don't know what will be tested here. Essentially, they will give you something which is odd or archaic from a grammar perspective, and they want you to use your knowledge and terms to DESCRIBE what is archaic about it.
Component 2 - Answering the 20 maker part (b)
Part (b) - 4-6 marks. (Seems to usually be linked to standardisation or inconsistencies)
So on this bit, it seems to mainly point out words which show some sort of inconsistency.
It might be the same word spelled differently (fancie, fancy), or it might be different words where a grammatical seems to be a bit inconsistent (preparacion, inspiration - on this one, the issue is that the suffix of the noun is different in each case).
For each of these examples, they basically want you to describe what is going on using terms, and explain why. A lot of your answers for this bit will be explained by the fact that the text is PROBABLY pre-standardisation. If the issue is a spelling issue, make sure you mention that it is BEFORE Johnson's first dictionary 1755.
So your answers would look like this:
*The verbs fancie and fancy display inconsistent spelling here, due to the lack of standardised spelling as text predates Johnson's dictionary of 1755.
Or
*The abstract nouns preparacion and inspiration display inconsistent suffixes due to the text dating before standardisation. The onset of standardisation would have made grammatical rules like this more uniform.
For each of these, you'd get a mark for the word class, and a mark for the explanation of what is going on and why.
Things to look out for:
Inconsistent spelling
Inconsistencies in prefixes and suffixes
Inconsistencies in compounds (sometimes use a hyphen, sometimes not)
Inconsistencies in methods of pluralisation (Cows/cowes, Oxen/oxes)
However, in each case you are simply describing what is happening, and explaining it USUALLY in relation to standardisation.
So on this bit, it seems to mainly point out words which show some sort of inconsistency.
It might be the same word spelled differently (fancie, fancy), or it might be different words where a grammatical seems to be a bit inconsistent (preparacion, inspiration - on this one, the issue is that the suffix of the noun is different in each case).
For each of these examples, they basically want you to describe what is going on using terms, and explain why. A lot of your answers for this bit will be explained by the fact that the text is PROBABLY pre-standardisation. If the issue is a spelling issue, make sure you mention that it is BEFORE Johnson's first dictionary 1755.
So your answers would look like this:
*The verbs fancie and fancy display inconsistent spelling here, due to the lack of standardised spelling as text predates Johnson's dictionary of 1755.
Or
*The abstract nouns preparacion and inspiration display inconsistent suffixes due to the text dating before standardisation. The onset of standardisation would have made grammatical rules like this more uniform.
For each of these, you'd get a mark for the word class, and a mark for the explanation of what is going on and why.
Things to look out for:
Inconsistent spelling
Inconsistencies in prefixes and suffixes
Inconsistencies in compounds (sometimes use a hyphen, sometimes not)
Inconsistencies in methods of pluralisation (Cows/cowes, Oxen/oxes)
However, in each case you are simply describing what is happening, and explaining it USUALLY in relation to standardisation.
Component 2 - Answering the 20 marker (a)
Ok so here it is in my own words. I'll try to keep this as short as possible, because the last thing you want is to take one look at it, and convince yourself its too complicated to bother with.
You should ALWAYS bother with it. Take a guess at EVERY question. Even if you only get one out of every five right, that's still FOUR marks you wouldn't have had if you just left it blank.
So...
There will always be a part a, b, c, d to this question. The way the marks are spread about may vary.
Part a - 4-6 marks
This ALWAYS asks you to identify word classes and archaic spelling patterns. So your answers would be something like (Vnusual = adjective, displaying u/v interchange) or (Somtimes = adverb, with omission of medial 'e')
All you have to do is learn the archaic spelling patterns and use your common sense to identify the word class (look at the function it is playing in the sentence - if you don't recognise the word, read it a few times. It may be a word that you know, but is obscured due to an interchange or something.)
If the spelling issue doesn't seem to fit one of the archaic spelling patterns you know, describe it anyway. You have nothing to lose by guessing. (eg, if the word was 'rumning' as in 'the suspect was seen rumning away', you can clearly see what the issue is. One of the Ns is written as an m. So just say something like - present participle verb with one n substituted for an M. You may get nothing for it, but it is better to try)
Here are the archaic patterns you need to memorise:
You should ALWAYS bother with it. Take a guess at EVERY question. Even if you only get one out of every five right, that's still FOUR marks you wouldn't have had if you just left it blank.
So...
There will always be a part a, b, c, d to this question. The way the marks are spread about may vary.
Part a - 4-6 marks
This ALWAYS asks you to identify word classes and archaic spelling patterns. So your answers would be something like (Vnusual = adjective, displaying u/v interchange) or (Somtimes = adverb, with omission of medial 'e')
All you have to do is learn the archaic spelling patterns and use your common sense to identify the word class (look at the function it is playing in the sentence - if you don't recognise the word, read it a few times. It may be a word that you know, but is obscured due to an interchange or something.)
If the spelling issue doesn't seem to fit one of the archaic spelling patterns you know, describe it anyway. You have nothing to lose by guessing. (eg, if the word was 'rumning' as in 'the suspect was seen rumning away', you can clearly see what the issue is. One of the Ns is written as an m. So just say something like - present participle verb with one n substituted for an M. You may get nothing for it, but it is better to try)
Here are the archaic patterns you need to memorise:
§Extra final –e (vowel) or you could say appended –e or inflected vowel
§Doubling (vppon, natural, seurall) and Single consonants (maners)
§Omission of medial e: wherby, somtimes
§Omission of final e: diuers
§Interchange: I/Y or U/V for example
§Inconsistencies or idiosyncratic spelling
§Phonetic spelling
§Loan Words : French/Latin or borrowing (like the text A in travel writing example)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)