Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Yu_Bum_suk]

Another grade 3 practice exam, another question that is not only pretty pointless for assessing communicative ability, but appears to have no right answer.

Here it is. Find the grammatical mistake:

Commercials on TV tell us all ht etime that we can change ourselves. (1) In thirty seconds, actors on commercials can get (2) thinner, prettier, and richer. But this fantasy would only (3) sets us up for a fall. We hear about the wonderful changes people can make in their lives, and we want to duplicate those results. But when we try (4) and are not quickly rewarded, we actually (5) wind up feeling worse than we did before we started. The problem is that change is possible, but it takes years to achieve the desired outcome.

Any takers? First person with a convincing explanation of what underlined part is wrong and why gets a pitcher should you ever run into me.

[refikaM]

But this fantasy would only (3) sets us up for a fall.

Correct: But this fantasy would only (3) set us up for a fall.

[refikaM]

Oh yeah... explanation.. Only the plain form of verbs are used after modals. In this case.. "would"

[Yu_Bum_suk]

Sorry - typo! It should be 'world', not 'would'. It should read

Commercials on TV tell us all ht etime that we can change ourselves. (1) In thirty seconds, actors on commercials can get (2) thinner, prettier, and richer. But this fantasy world only (3) sets us up for a fall. We hear about the wonderful changes people can make in their lives, and we want to duplicate those results. But when we try (4) and are not quickly rewarded, we actually (5) wind up feeling worse than we did before we started. The problem is that change is possible, but it takes years to achieve the desired outcome.

Sorry for wasting your time there.

[Dimitris Stylianos]

[Pink Freud]

Wow. Mavens might focus on the two conjunctions starting sentences, but these don't appear to be choices that are available to the students....and using "but" to start a sentence is now considered a matter of style rather than grammar.

I'm going to go with (1), and suggest that the "In thirty seconds" be replaced with "Within thirty seconds..."

"In thirty seconds" suggests "After thirty seconds" ex. "In thirty seconds the time will be five o'clock."

"Within thirty seconds" suggests "Before thirty seconds has passed" ex. "He'll be back within thirty seconds."

I'm not convinced by my own answer, but don't see anything else right now...

[The Gipkik]

I've heard the "in thirty seconds' opinion before, so that shouldn't be the problem. There isn't a legitimate or formally acceptable mistake here. It is a little colloquial, but it is fine. I think the test makers copied the passage, but forgot to add the mistake in after the fact.

[Joe666]

Maybe this: thinner, prettier, and richer.

You don't need the comma after prettier, before the word and.

I suck at grammer, punctuation and spelling. I forgot all the basic rules of the English language. Yet here I am!

[Yu_Bum_suk]

[Yu_Bum_suk]

[Insidejohnmalkovich]

The comma after prettier is called the Oxford serial comma or something like that, because the Oxford Press considers it necessary, whereas American journalistic editors consider it unnecessary. I had a futile argument with a bunch of Korean teachers who insisted that the serial comma is a universal and mandatory rule. See, Koreans know more about grammar than us. <make a wry face>

So while that could be the answer the test is looking for, it probably is not.

[Joe666]

What about this: But when we try (4) and are not quickly rewarded,


The "and are not quickly rewarded" should read - "and not quickly rewarded"

This is my last shot. See my previous post for explanation!!

[ursus_rex]

Should "are not quickly rewarded" be "are not rewarded quickly"? Just spit-balling.

[tenchu77491]

I will be the second poster to say the starting of a sentence with a conjunction should be wrong or at the very least-- disgusting English.

I guess I will shoot for number 1 as a disgusting use of a comma or better yet, maybe number 4 because it uses a disgusting conjunction and a disgusting comma with a weird set of logic that almost appears to be a run on sentence.

[John_ESL_White]

re-type the question carefully, exactly as it appears on the test.

and let's go from there.