AQA Qualifications
A-LEVEL
ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND
LITERATURE B
ELLB3 / Unit 3: Talk in Life and Literature
Mark scheme
2725
June 2014
Version 1.0: Final
Mark schemes are prepared by the Lead Assessment Writer and considered, together with the
relevant questions, by a panel of subject teachers. This mark scheme includes any amendments
made at the standardisation events which all associates participate in and is the scheme which was
used by them in this examination. The standardisation process ensures that the mark scheme covers
the students’ responses to questions and that every associate understands and applies it in the same
correct way. As preparation for standardisation each associate analyses a number of students’
scripts: alternative answers not already covered by the mark scheme are discussed and legislated for.
If, after the standardisation process, associates encounter unusual answers which have not been
raised they are required to refer these to the Lead Assessment Writer.
It must be stressed that a mark scheme is a working document, in many cases further developed and
expanded on the basis of students’ reactions to a particular paper. Assumptions about future mark
schemes on the basis of one year’s document should be avoided; whilst the guiding principles of
assessment remain constant, details will change, depending on the content of a particular
examination paper.
Further copies of this Mark Scheme are available from aqa.org.uk
Copyright © 2014 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved.
AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this
booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any
material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Unit 3 requires students to answer:


one compulsory question on their chosen play
one compulsory question based on an unseen transcript
Examiners should be aware of the four relevant Assessment Objectives, described in the
specification.
AO1 Select and apply relevant concepts and approaches from integrated linguistic and
literary study, using appropriate terminology and accurate, coherent written expression
AO2 Demonstrate detailed critical understanding in analysing the ways in which
structure, form and language shape meanings in a range of spoken and written texts
AO3 Use integrated approaches to explore relationships between texts, analysing and
evaluating the significance of contextual factors in their production and reception
AO4 Demonstrate expertise and creativity in using language appropriately for a variety
of purposes and audiences, drawing on insights from linguistic and literary studies
3 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
SECTION A
MAIN CRITERIA FOR ANSWERS
To be placed in a particular mark band, it is not necessary for a candidate to demonstrate
achievement under every bullet point. Examiners should therefore assess a student’s work under
the ‘best fit’ principle.
BAND 6
42 – 48
Very good answers: the best that can be expected of A2 students under examination conditions
key characteristic – analyses
 uses fluent, accurate expression and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows good and detailed understanding of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 analyses dialogue/discourse with critical understanding of structure/form/language (AO2)
 analyses/evaluates contextual factors and effects on production/reception of texts (AO3)
 applies relevant concepts and theoretical approaches to texts (AO1, AO2, AO3)
 demonstrates expertise and creativity in writing for/recognising audience/purpose (AO4)
BAND 5
34 – 41
Good answers displaying qualities of top band; some lack of consistency or thoroughness; many
more strengths than weaknesses
key characteristic – explores
 accurate use of language and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows sound and clear understanding of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 shows sound and clear understanding of structure/form/language in lit/ling. texts (AO2)
 shows clear knowledge and understanding of how texts are influenced by contexts (AO3)
 some application (explicit/implicit) of relevant concepts/approaches to texts (AO1, AO2, AO3)
 showing some expertise and creativity in writing for/recognising audience/purpose (AO4)
BAND 4
25 – 33
Answers in which there is a balance of strengths and weaknesses
key characteristic - explains
 generally accurate use of language and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows reasonable understanding of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 shows some understanding of structure/form/language in lit/ling. texts (AO2)
 shows some knowledge of how texts are influenced by contexts (AO3)
 may refer to some relevant concepts/approaches when explaining points (AO1, AO2, AO3)
 shows some sustained ability in writing for/recognising audience/purpose (AO4)
BAND 3
17 – 24
Answers that address the question, but have a few significant weaknesses
key characteristic – identifies
 mainly accurate use of language and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows simple knowledge of literary/linguistic features in talk; some feature-spotting (AO1, AO2)
 some general awareness of structure/form/language in lit/ling. texts (AO2)
 some sense that context influences how characters/people speak (AO3)
 vague reference to ‘theory’; generalises without text support; running commentary (AO2, AO3)
 some elements of ability in writing for/recognising audience/purpose, but inconsistent (AO4)
4 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
BAND 2
9 – 16
Answers that have a number of significant weaknesses; may contain irrelevance,
misunderstanding and gaps in knowledge
key characteristic- narrates/describes
 some inaccurate use of language and inappropriate terminology (AO1)
 basic awareness of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 thin and sketchy awareness of structure/form/language in texts (AO2)
 basic recognition of contextual factors (plot/simple character relationships) (AO3)
 very limited ability; minimal sense of audience/purpose (AO4)
BAND 1
0–8
Answers that are little more than rudimentary and/or fragmentary
key characteristic – randomness
 very inaccurate use of language and terminology, frequent lapses in control (AO1)
 minimal recognition of literary/linguistic features or of structure/form in talk (AO2)
 only vaguely/partially recognises context (plot/situation) (AO3)
 minimal ability; unprepared; naïve (AO4)
NOTE TO EXAMINERS
As noted earlier, examiners are reminded that to be placed in a particular mark band, it is not
necessary for a candidate to demonstrate achievement on every point of the descriptors above.
Suggested procedure is as follows:
 decide on which mark band seems the ‘best fit’ for an answer.
 check how many descriptors in that band are fulfilled by the script
 check the indicative content of the answer.
 high scores on descriptors and indicative content suggest the mark should be around the
top of band/bottom of next band; low scores suggest the mark should be well down in the
band.
POSITIVE MARKING
Examiners should mark positively at all times, rewarding strengths and achievements and making
use of the full marking scale, and ensuring that credit is given for all relevant and well-supported
arguments.
5 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
EITHER
King Lear – William Shakespeare
(Act 4, scene 6, lines 11–74)
Question 1
01
Explore the ways in which Shakespeare presents Edgar’s deception of Gloucester in this
passage. In your answer you must consider how the playwright uses literary, linguistic and
rhetorical devices and conventions to create specific dramatic effects.
[48 marks]
INDICATIVE CONTENT
Discussion of ‘Edgar’s deception of Gloucester’ including thematic links across the play
(Please note that candidates would not necessarily be expected to include all the contextual
details given below. The full discussion here is provided for general guidance.)
Before this scene:
Edmund has plotted against his brother, Edgar, and using a false letter, and a staged fight, has
convinced Gloucester that Edgar is planning to murder him. Edgar, forced to flee, becomes a
Bedlam beggar – ‘Tom’. Gloucester remains loyal to Lear; meets disguised Edgar during the storm;
but does not recognise him; speaks poignantly of the son he loved ‘No father his son dearer’ and of
grief that hath ‘crazed my wits.’ Gloucester deemed a traitor by Regan and Goneril; Regan and
Cornwall remove his eyes and reveal that Edmund had betrayed him. Gloucester asks Tom to take
him to Dover and bring him to ‘a cliff whose high and bending head/Looks fearfully in the confined
deep. /Bring me but to the very brim of it’. Prescience of his comments: ‘madmen lead the blind’
and ‘As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods; /They kill us for their sport.’
In this scene:
A total contrast with some of the previous, brief scenes (short scenes of betrayal ,deceit,
callousness - sisters fighting – rivals for Edmund’s favours – Albany condemned as a ‘Milk-livered
man’). Tender, strange interlude: Tom continues his deception and play-acting as the mad beggar (
but what he says is clear and carefully constructed ) with the pretence of reaching the cliff and
miraculously surviving the fall in a (cruelly?) humiliating episode. Gloucester is presented as kind,
fatalistic, a broken man; loathing his mistake and feeling worthless, wanting to commit suicide, and
initially devastated that he has not done so. A poignant theatrical scene, heavily ironic.
In the whole play:
Edgar’s convincing portrayal of mad Tom focuses audience on the nature of madness; provides
contrast too with the seemingly rational but mad jealousies of the sisters and their heartless,
unnatural vengeance, and the real madness of Lear. His gentleness contrasts with the wily, selfcentred and embittered Edmund; also reminds us of the wisdom of the fool and Lear’s
pronouncement about this ‘great stage of fools’. Edgar plays important role in the plot – in later
stages exposing Goneril’s desire for Edmund which eventually leads to the death of both sisters.
Power is delegated to him finally.
Gloucester is the loyal, dutiful nobleman but one who is easily tricked by a less honest schemer.
His final reuniting with Edgar occurs off-stage as does his death. His age and his falling out with his
son parallels some of Lear’s problems and highlights themes: fate, nature, justice, loyalty, love etc.
6 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
Dramatic effects created by context and dramatic situation
Melodramatic situation, but touching, moving scene - audience waiting tensely for outcome. Will
Gloucester be totally humiliated? Will he suspect who the beggar is (he has noticed some
difference in his speech)? Will they be re-united now? Sad spectacle of blind despair. Edgar
creates evocative picture of the scene, spinning words imaginatively to draw audience in. Interest
in Edgar’s purposes, and concerns hinted at in the asides. Dramatic, suicidal speech from
Gloucester, addressed to the Gods and reminding audience about pain and loss and ‘great
affliction’ which Gloucester bears.
Dramatic effects created by use of literary, linguistic, and rhetorical conventions and
devices (including discourse conventions.)
Edgar dominates initially with lengthier turn, but Gloucester quietly and simply issues orders (‘Set
me where you stand’; ‘Go thou further off’). Gloucester centre stage with exclamative to the Gods
and bewailing his ‘loathed part of nature’. Edgar’s asides create sense of his unease and
misgivings. After the fall he dominates again with hyperbolic descriptions of ‘miracle survival’ and
practical help - imperatives (‘Give me your arm’) and interrogatives (‘Feel you your legs?’).
Adjacency pairs, with Edgar’s lengthier turns – trying to convince Gloucester that the fall was real,
and that a ‘fiend’ accompanied him at the cliff top. Shared lines suggest faster pace.
Edgar uses hyperbole in descriptions of fiend (‘he had a thousand noses’) and elaborate, sensuous
detail to create cliff scene: ‘murmuring surge’; ‘gross as beetles’. Sound play (sibilants, alliteration,
onomatopoeia, assonance, consonance); simple active verbs: ‘wing’ , ‘walk’, ‘chafes’, ‘topple’;
figurative language (similes eg: – fishermen like ‘mice’ – hints of humour). More hyperbole in
‘gossamer, feathers, Air’ speech – bathos of ‘shivered like an egg’. Overall, lexis a mixture
(suggesting some artificiality, forced images): from romantic images ‘murmuring surge’ to more
banal language –‘ dreadful trade’; ‘no bigger than his head’, ‘ topple’, ‘shivered’. Also, confident
declarative – ‘But thou dost breathe’ etc, with effective mirroring and tripling: ‘bleed’st not; speak’st;
art sound.’ Overall impression - contrived and theatrical, compared with Gloucester. His lexis
(‘affliction’, ‘bear’, ‘ loathed’, ‘burn’) stresses absolute despair. Candle image graphically conveys
course of his life. Rhetorical questions convey mood: ‘Is wretchedness deprived that benefit, /To
end itself by death?’ Simpler moments too with direct imperatives: ‘Away, and let me die’. Mixture
of mood and tone, from direct questions ‘But have I fall’n or no?’ to exclamatives ‘Alack’ and ‘O you
mighty Gods’.
7 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
The Way of the World – William Congreve
(Act 3, scene 1, lines 441 – 494)
OR
Question 2
02
Explore the ways in which Congreve presents the relationship between Sir Wilfull and
Witwoud in this passage. In your answer you must consider how the playwright uses literary,
linguistic and rhetorical devices and conventions to create specific dramatic effects.
[48 marks]
INDICATIVE CONTENT
Explanation of ‘the relationship between Sir Wilfull and Witwoud’ including thematic links
across the play
(Please note that candidates would not necessarily be expected to include all the contextual
details given below. The full discussion here is provided for general guidance.)
Before this scene:
Witwoud with his friend Petulant are admirers of Mrs Millamant. Witwoud purports to be a wit, who
speaks of his half-brother, Wilfull, as ‘the fool of my brother’. Petulant’s view on Witwoud is that
he’s ‘a fine gentleman’; Witwoud sees Petulant as having ‘no more breeding than a bum-bailey’,
but they seem inseparable. Sir Wilfull, nephew to Lady Wishfort, comes from the country
(Shropshire) and is due to visit her, before he sets off on his travels (much scorned by everyone –
he is 40 and thought too old); before his arrival Mrs Marwood has proposed him as a good match
for Mrs Millamant. He arrives in his country riding habit and Witwoud pretends not to recognise
him, encouraging Petulant to ‘Smoke him’, (mock him), especially for his unfashionable attire.
In this scene:
Witwoud’s coldness contrasts with Wilfull’s endearing honesty and lack of airs and graces. Wilfull
finds it difficult to recognise his ‘becravated and beperiwigged’ brother and he mocks his London
ways and his so-called ‘Inns o’court breeding’. Witwoud mocks Wilfull’s unfashionable (by London
standards) ebullience.(embarrassed by him?) Wilfull directly criticises what his pretentious ‘fop of a
brother’ has become. Petulant is amused but Witwoud is initially wrong-footed and counteracts with
snobbish condemnation of ‘felt-maker’ trade. The brothers are very different and Witwoud is keen
to preserve his distance from his country roots.
In the whole play:
Congreve reveals the deceit, double-dealing and pretentiousness of London life. Sir Wilfull is seen
as ridiculous and a butt of humour, but ultimately his honesty, his lack of any adherence to
fashionable behaviour, (Mrs Millamant calls him ‘Rustic! Ruder than Gothic’) – create an endearing
character, who is generous in the end in conceding his place as suitor to Mirabell. He provides
contrast with the so-called London wits and his drunken scene provides knockabout humour and
ribaldry. Witwoud plays a lesser part in the rest of the play, except to sum up possible audience
reaction to the twists in the plot: ‘Egad I understand nothing of the matter; I’m in a maze yet, like a
dog in a dancing school.’
Their relationship is uneasy and it reveals the extent of Witwoud’s desire to forget his country
origins and to appear as the fashionable, sophisticated Londoner. Such snobbish behaviour is only
one aspect of a play which focuses on marriage, greed, the nature of love, wit, perversity etc.
8 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
Dramatic effects created by context and dramatic situation:
A very amusing scene which hinges on the contrast between Wilfull’s manners and speech and
Witwoud’s more posed reserve. Visual humour of Wilfull’s appearance compared with the foppish
fashion of Witwoud. Verbal humour in the outburst of Wilfull and his oaths and images (‘hare’s
foot’, ‘hare’s scut’ etc.) and his honest revelations about his brother’s humbler origins. Audience’s
delight when Witwoud is disturbed – how will he deal with this revelation? He finally appeals to
everyone by stressing the awfulness of what might have been – apprentice to trade. This allows for
the satisfying rejoinder by Wilfull - ‘better than to be bound to a maker of fops’;- audience on his
side.
Dramatic effects created by use of literary, linguistic and rhetorical conventions and
devices (including discourse conventions).
Sir Wilfull – lengthier turns – more verbose – expressive, full of exclamatives, rhetorical questions –
many pauses and topic changes as he gathers thoughts. Witwoud: terse replies, sometimes
barbed (‘No offence’ – echoing Wilfull’s earlier phrase – sarcastic tone). Allows Wilfull to have the
floor, except rejoinder about criticism of his breeding leads to longer outburst of arrogant selfconsciously clever polemic about fashion (‘short as a Shrewsbury cake’). Final longer turn in
explanation of his past (nervous repetition- ‘Ay, Ay’, ‘Not long, not long’.) Modes of address vary
from overly polite ‘Sir’ to ‘dear brother’, ‘Brother Anthony’ and the mocking ‘brother Wilfull of Salop.’
Sir Wilfull’s idiolect- colloquial – full of oaths and exclamations (‘sheart’; ‘A pox’ etc) and discourse
markers and fillers: ‘Hum!’, ‘Why’, ‘and so forth’; collocations (‘friends and your relations, elders
and betters’). Much use of colourful descriptions (‘scrap of paper gilt.’ etc.), alliterative, aphoristic
phrases: ‘so cold and so courtly’; ‘The fashion’s a fool, and you’re a fop’. Witwoud generally more
precise and less elaborate: ellipted ‘No offence, I hope, brother’; simpler syntax ‘He had the
disposal of me then’; but also uses sound play (consonance, onomatopoeia of ‘lubberly’ and
‘slabber’) and figurative language (‘like a call of serjeants’) to make point about London fashion ‘not modish to know relations in town.’
9 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
The Crucible – Arthur Miller
(Act 2)
OR
Question 3
03
Explore the ways in which Miller presents Proctor’s attitude to religion in this passage. In
your answer you must consider how the playwright uses literary, linguistic and rhetorical
devices and conventions to create specific dramatic effects.
[48 marks]
INDICATIVE CONTENT
Explanation of ‘Proctor’s attitude to religion’ including thematic links across the play.
(Please note that candidates would not necessarily be expected to include all the contextual
details given below. The full discussion here is provided for general guidance.)
Before this scene:
Audience already aware of Proctor’s animosity towards Parris; Parris has accused him of not being
at a ‘Sabbath meeting since snow flew.’ Proctor has already expressed distaste for endless
preaching about hellfire and damnation; and criticised concern with money and mortgages (‘Parris
spoke so long on deeds and mortgages I thought it were an auction.’) and he is wary of Parris's
authoritarian stance (‘ I like not the smell of this authority.’). Audience aware of Proctor’s guilt - of
having sinned with Abigail; his general unease.
In this scene:
Proctor reacts defensively to Hale’s inquisition; reveals an independent thinker who dislikes any
probing authority. A practical farmer, who has put his family’s needs before personal worship – but
still one who prays. Uses the opportunity to criticise Parris and his greed and need for overt display
and angrily compares Parris’s values to his own (his hard labours). Implies Parris is materialistic
and not worthy of his position. Independent thinker, he cannot accept Parris’s authority because he
sees ‘no light of God in that man’ – to the extent that he has not allowed Parris to baptise one of
his children.
In the whole play:
Later, Proctor asserts he loves God in front of the court, but the climactic, hysterical accusing
scene when Mary Warren under Abigail’s influence condemns him – leads to his angry outburst
that ‘God is dead’ and that ‘You are pulling Heaven down and raising up a whore.’ He finally
refuses to have his confession published and be damned for lies, and for condemning others. His
final principled stance expiates his guilt; he is clearly a man who despises petty authoritarianism
and this harmful obsession with the devil and witchcraft. He is not anti-church or anti-religion per
se, but anti a movement which sweeps away any humane concerns in the so-called spurious
interests of justice, and in fear of any independent thinking or movement which might threaten the
hold of the theocracy. Underpinning all his actions, however, is the bitter knowledge that he has
sinned, committed adultery-and the fearful realisation that Abigail is the driving force behind the
accusations which are punishing him and his wife and many others.
Dramatic effects created by context and dramatic situation:
A tense scene with Hale taking the leading role; his accusations backed up by facts/records.
Audience concerned to see how Proctor defends himself. Matter-of-fact tone gradually replaced by
10 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
mounting emotion; audience sympathise with Proctor’s description of his hard labour and his
resentment of Parris’s apparently easy acquisition of wealth. Proctor’s lengthy turn carefully builds
from poignant reminders of simple adornment to vitriolic criticisms of a priest who reveres outward
display. Audience sense Proctor is being provoked into further admissions and accusations – more
tension, how will he react to accusation of parental neglect of baptism? His blunt statement is
shockingly honest. Tension is then eased with Proctor’s back-tracking and Hale’s agreement and
Elizabeth’s final admission. Tension is defused.
Dramatic effects created by use of literary, linguistic and rhetorical conventions and
devices (including discourse conventions)
Hale sets agenda with a tentative, polite opening (‘permit me’); Proctor’s first response is defensive
and hesitant creating immediate tension. Initially even turns/adjacency pairs; dominance moves to
Proctor with introduction of ‘golden candlesticks’ and lengthier turn, with climactic, alliterative
declaration (‘cathedrals, not clapboard meetin’ houses.’) Hale’s inquisition continues, but wrongfooted by Proctor’s interrogative (‘What’s your suspicion, Mr Hale?’) and his interruption (‘I nailed’.)
Proctor takes charge and Hale backtracks. Modes of address change from Sir, to Mister to Mr
Hale, Mr Proctor – polite formality retained, but tone varies (?) Utterances rarely exclamative until
end – both speakers fairly controlled?
Lexis varies from language of the court (direct questioning; use of modal auxiliaries: ‘must’, ‘will’
and verbs such as ‘note’ ‘tell’) to more colourful language of Proctor (figurative and alliterative:
‘dawn of day to blink of night’; more colloquial language, distinct idiolect – ‘for I come to church’; ‘it
hurt my prayer’; accent portrayed through ellipsis and elision – ‘nothin’, ‘y’know’.) Proctor’s
rejoinders more expressive, full of concrete detail, using rhetorical devices such as repetition, ‘it
hurt my prayer’; hyperbole, (‘dawn of day etc.’); antithesis (‘cathedrals’ - ‘clapboard meetin’
houses’). Hale very different: exact, measured sentences - sounds practised, rational (balanced
sentence: ‘The man’s ordained, therefore the light of God is in him’.) – until change near end – use
of repetition, hesitation, reformulation indicating uncertainty.
Politeness strategies operate throughout, despite mounting tension. Elizabeth politely conciliatory
at the end.
11 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
Waiting for Godot – Samuel Beckett
Act 2
OR
Question 4
04
Explore the ways in which Beckett presents attitudes to thinking and talking in this
passage. In your answer you must consider how the playwright uses literary, linguistic and
rhetorical devices and conventions to create specific dramatic effects.
[48 marks]
INDICATIVE CONTENT
Explanation of ‘attitudes to thinking and talking’ including thematic links across the play.
(Please note that candidates would not necessarily be expected to include all the contextual
details given below. The full discussion here is provided for general guidance.)
Before this scene:
In Act 1, many silences juxtaposed with stories, to pass time while waiting for Godot. Interlude with
Lucky and Pozzo provokes thoughts about language, time, the absurdity of human condition.
Lucky’s talk - a meaningless elaborated flow, full of disconnected allusions. Vladimir’s reaction:
‘That passed the time’, and Estragon: ‘It would have passed in any case’. Sense of helplessness
and uncertainty: ‘The essential doesn’t change’; ‘Nothing to be done.’ Characters’ talk is circular,
negative. But tramps share fears and questions.
In this scene:
Talk about death; recognition that any noise/talk is better than silence. Need to voice feelings and
fears - to avoid ‘thinking’. Noise of dead spirits talking; Estragon and Vladimir trying to find words to
describe the noises. Painful recognition that silence is frightening and making decisions difficult.
They explore the idea of thinking and the impossibility of avoiding it, or avoiding talking about it.
In the whole play:
Estragon and Vladimir search for words to define their feelings and experiences; endlessly
thwarted in trying to describe events; pass time with ‘blathering’, but recognition that ‘we are all
born mad. Some remain so.’ Throughout, all diversions are welcome as Vladimir admits in Act 3‘We are bored.’ By end of play and final scenes with blind Pozzo, Vladimir admits ‘I don’t know
what to think any more’ so they continue to try and construct some purpose in their lives - and
decide to wait for the mythical Godot.
Dramatic effects created by context and dramatic situation
Scene immediately preceded by discussions about memory and previous events with the tree and
Pozzo and Lucky - neither remembers in the same way. Estragon angry at how he has 'puked my
puke of a life away here’. Irritated with each other. Estragon teasing and melancholy; Vladimir as
usual attempts to broaden significance of discussion with reference to ‘every man his little cross’.
Musing on death leads into Estragon’s declaration that they cannot keep silent. Leads into wistful,
chant-like section attempting to categorise noise of the dead - quietly dramatic, choric moment –
but conflict always present: Estragon insists on likeness to leaves (linking with tree image) but
Vladimir more imaginative, never agrees with Estragon. Tension – Vladimir wants any thoughts or
noises to fill the silence; sense of pointless quest; ambivalence of thinking - avoids the void and
12 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
misery. Dialogue ends on note of the unavoidability, but ultimate pointlessness of time filling with
questions. Audience irritated, bemused, depressed, puzzled – but feel empathy with two men lost
and struggling (like the audience) to make sense of events.
Dramatic effects created by use of literary, linguistic and rhetorical conventions and
devices (including discourse conventions).
Some moments of adjacency pairs, (eg: ‘What other?’ ‘Like billions of others’.) but some questions
unanswered and/or declaratives not commented on (‘We have our reasons’ ‘All the dead voices’)
create sense of disjointed dialogue – each character in own world. Except choric section more
superficially cooperative – similar syntax; chant-like repetition. Estragon keeps to analogy with
leaves/trees whereas Vladimir uses more varied lexis/ ideas: ‘comparisons with birds (wings,
feathers) with ‘sand’, ‘whisper’ etc. Black humour in ‘To be dead is not enough for them’.
Dominance switches from Estragon at the outset (‘..let us try and converse calmly’) to Vladimir
leading the choric section ( ‘They make a noise like wings’) and then imperative: ‘Say something’
and expressive exclamations ‘This is awful’. Estragon more matter-of fact in tone and supportive to
Vladimir’s suggestions (‘When you seek you hear’. ‘You do’. ) But Estragon takes control again
towards end of the passage: ‘Then what are we complaining about?’ and ‘..let’s ask each other
questions.’
Overall, lexis simple, exchanges short. Aphoristic allusion ‘To every man his little cross’ otherwise, some sensuous lexis in similes: ‘sand’, ‘murmur’, ‘rustle’ – poetically self-conscious
moments. Rhetorical features: listing and use of repetition; audience senses build up to a climax
which never happens. (Begins with ‘Like leaves’ and ends with the same.) Ellipted sentences,
much deixis (‘All the dead voices’). Pacey interaction punctuated by lengthy pauses. Device of
silence leaves audience thinking and puzzling. Sound play emphasises contrasts and sums up
their actions and attitudes.– : ‘anything’, ‘something’, ‘finding’, ‘ thinking’, ‘complaining’, ‘trying’.
13 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
SECTION B
MAIN CRITERIA FOR ANSWERS
To be placed in a particular mark band, it is not necessary for a candidate to demonstrate
achievement under every bullet point. Examiners should therefore assess a student’s work under
the ‘best fit’ principle.
BAND 6
42 – 48
Very good answers: the best that can be expected of A2 students under examination conditions
Key characteristic – analyses
 uses fluent, accurate expression and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows good and detailed understanding of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 analyses dialogue/discourse with critical understanding of structure/form/language (AO2)
 analyses/evaluates the differences/similarities between talk in life and literature; sustained
perceptive comparison (AO3)
 applies relevant concepts and theoretical approaches to texts (AO1, AO2, AO3)
BAND 5
34 – 41
Good answers displaying qualities of top band; some lack of consistency or thoroughness; many
more strengths than weaknesses
Key characteristic – explores
 accurate use of language and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows sound and clear understanding of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 shows sound and clear understanding of structure/form/language in lit/ling. texts (AO2)
 shows clear knowledge and understanding of the differences/similarities between talk in life and
literature; sound, explicit comparison (AO3)
 some application (explicit/implicit) of relevant concepts/approaches to texts (AO1, AO2, AO3)
BAND 4
25 – 33
Answers in which there is a balance of strengths and weaknesses
Key characteristic – explains
 generally accurate use of language and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows reasonable understanding of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 shows some understanding of structure/form/language in lit/ling. texts (AO2)
 shows some knowledge and understanding of the differences/similarities between talk in life
and literature; some interesting comparisons, both explicit and implicit (AO3)
 may refer to some relevant concepts/approaches when explaining points (AO1, AO2, AO3)
BAND 3
17 – 24
Answers that address the question, but have a few significant weaknesses
Key characteristic – identifies
 mainly accurate use of language and appropriate terminology (AO1)
 shows simple knowledge of literary/linguistic features in talk; some feature-spotting (AO1, AO2)
 some general awareness of structure/form/language in lit/ling. texts (AO2)
 some sense of the differences/similarities between talk in life and literature; some useful
comparisons though limited in scope with some superficiality (AO3)
 vague reference to ‘theory’; generalises without text support; running commentary (AO2, AO3)
14 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
BAND 2
9 – 16
Answers that have a number of significant weaknesses; may contain irrelevance,
misunderstanding and gaps in knowledge
Key characteristic – narrates/describes
 some inaccurate use of language and inappropriate terminology (AO1)
 basic awareness of literary and linguistic features in talk (AO1, AO2)
 thin and sketchy awareness of structure/form/language in texts (AO2)
 basic recognition of the differences/similarities between talk in life and literature; some focused
comparisons though at a superficial level (AO3)
BAND 1
0–8
Answers that are little more than rudimentary and/or fragmentary
Key characteristic – randomness
 very inaccurate use of language and terminology, frequent lapses in control (AO1)
 minimal recognition of literary/linguistic features or of structure/form in talk (AO2)
 only vaguely/partially recognises the differences/similarities between talk in life and literature;
neglect/omission of purposeful comparisons; may be forced or unconvincing (AO3)
NOTE TO EXAMINERS
As noted earlier, examiners are reminded that to be placed in a particular mark band, it is not
necessary for a candidate to demonstrate achievement on every point of the descriptors above.
The suggested procedure is as follows:
 decide on which mark band seems the ‘best-fit’ for an answer
 check how many descriptors in that band are fulfilled by the script
 check the indicative content of the answer
 high scores on descriptors and indicative content suggest the mark should be around the top of
band/bottom of next band; low scores suggest the mark should be well down in the band.
POSITIVE MARKING
Examiners should mark positively at all times, rewarding strengths and achievements and making
use of the full marking scale, and ensuring that credit is given for all relevant and well-supported
arguments.
15 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
Question 5
05
Text A is part of a recorded conversation between a lecturer in the English department at
Stanford University (Interviewer), and Renato Rosaldo (RR) a professor of anthropology at
the same university in California.
The conversation took place before a live audience and was one in a series where different
people were interviewed about their writing. The transcript of the interview was made freely
available on the university website.
Text B - ‘The Trouble with Poetry’ - is a poem by Billy Collins in which the poet talks about
poets and poetry writing. It was first published in 2005.
Compare the two texts, commenting on ways in which they reflect the differences and
similarities between talk in life and talk in literature. In your answer you must explore the
relationship between context, purpose and audience and the ways in which speakers’
attitudes and values are conveyed.
[48 marks]
INDICATIVE CONTENT
Comparing features of talk in life and talk in literature
Text A:
An informal conversation, but participants aware of its public nature: recording to be disseminated
widely. Interviewer relaxes interviewee, with informal register: use of tags - ‘I mean’, ‘I think’ and
inclusive assertions – ‘but, you know, it’s true’; colloquial lexis ‘Ping’; relaxed discourse markers
(Well); many reformulations and hesitations giving the impression of spontaneity rather than
formulaic debate. Expressive: ‘It feels like’; ‘marvellous pleasure’. Occasional use of more
elaborate language: ‘continuum’, ‘ethnography.’ Interviewee uses similar mixture of lexis from
simple monosyllabic ‘ sometimes these things will come to me’ to colloquial and colourful ‘putter’
and ‘critters’ and more expressive phrases (‘soul-seeking’); some more subject specific lexis
(‘condensing’) and individual figurative language: ‘slate of ambitions’.
Interviewer sets agenda and gently topic changes, allowing interviewee longer turns. He uses a
barrage of questions as well as controversial declaratives to provoke discussion (‘poetry is not so
very different’). Shorter exchanges (some adjacency pairs) followed by more leisurely exposition.
Text B:
Thought – provoking, apparently simple talk about poetry writing: musing about the creative
process. Much monosyllabic lexis creating an understated, almost casual tone to the poem (‘And
how will it ever end?’ etc..) Uses colloquial expressions: ‘And along with that’; ‘to be perfectly
honest for a moment’ (clear imitation of a speaking voice) and demotic language : ‘the trouble
with poetry is/that it encourages the writing of more poetry’ (not grandiose or forced language, but
pedantically clear sentences as if quietly lecturing the audience in a bemused voice) .
Lexis is generally simple throughout, but he creates striking contrasting sections - moving from a
quietly conversational and humorous first half (with ‘guppies’ and ‘baby rabbits hopping’) to more
elevated phrases such as ‘I rise like a feather in the wind’. Also uses less dramatic but equally
effective figurative language, expressed with a child-like simplicity: ‘wait for a little flame/to appear
at the tip of my pencil’.
Thoughts are clearly structured in verses, with use of enjambement and many poetic techniques:
alliteration (eg: ‘moved its megaphone’), consonance (‘guppies’, ‘rabbits hopping’) etc. Overall
16 of 17
MARK SCHEME – A-LEVEL ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE B – ELLB3 – JUNE 2014
sense of poet talking directly and intimately to the reader in a self-deprecatory way, using
everyday language with a disarming honesty but mixing this with more recognisably poetic
descriptions such as.‘ a cold wave swirled around my feet’ or Shakespearian sounding ‘unmerry
band of thieves’ and ‘cut-purses’.
Exploring context, purpose and audience
Text A:
The context is probably a recording studio at the university, so initial audience is technicians, the
two conversationalists and the studio audience; but knowingly recorded for a wider audience of
students or anyone with internet access. Expressive, expository interaction - purpose is to educate,
entertain and provoke thinking about creativity. Rather self-conscious informality – but stays
focused on purpose.
Text B:
The context is the poet musing self-consciously, addressing the audience (reader/listener) in an
intimate way, recollecting his thoughts which occurred whilst apparently walking along a beach in
Florida. The authorial purpose is to entertain and to provoke the reader into thinking about the
poetic process and the nature of inspiration and the endless search for original images, together
with the inevitability of plagiarism – all celebrated, ironically, in a quietly original way.
Exploring the ways in which attitudes and values are conveyed
Text A:
R.R. reveals distaste for obscure verse: ‘that artificial stuff nobody could understand’. Believes
poetry is not a strange language but one which is condensed Admits writing is pleasurable
addiction; believes in going ‘someplace else’, allowing day-dreaming before writing. Implies writing
is hard work – involves re-drafting and ‘doing’. Some questions show desire to be exact – I: ‘poetry
is not so very different’; R.R.: ‘From what?’ Sense of humour too (‘critters’, ‘mega-click’).
Interviewer sounds slightly in awe at times; nervous questioning initially? But prepared to be
controversial – (‘Well, a lot of people think there’s a big difference.’) Friendly and interested
approach - mirrors R.R.’s language (‘Yeah’). But not always clear thinking and does not follow up
on points (e.g.- topic changes : from ‘brain experiences poetry’ to ‘healing process’ to ‘ping’.)
Allowing RR to take the floor and dominate? So, aware of his role? Does successfully provoke RR
to reveal some personal details.
Text B:
The poet complains (tongue-in–cheek) about the sheer volume of poems that are written and the
banal sentimentality of some verse (rabbits ‘hopping....into the dewy grass.’) He suggests that
perhaps we will eventually run out of illuminating comparisons. After these misgivings, however, he
declares that poetry fills him with joy – but he also concisely highlights how it also fills him with
desperation (‘sorrow’ making him ‘sink like a chain flung from a bridge.’) His surface ambivalence,
however, is betrayed by the creative images that he clearly enjoys creating (eg: the lighthouse
image or the ‘flame’). Overall we move from an almost dismissive approach to poetry suggesting humorously - that there is far too much verse which strains to be original, to the recognition of
the amazing pleasure poetry can bring and the acceptance of poetic tradition and the inevitability
of ‘borrowings ‘: an ‘unmerry band of thieves’.
We are left with the sense of the power of poetry and that it can be spun from the simplest of
language and images – as he does - and yet ‘trouble’ us and make us think. (Why, for example
does he leave us with an image of ‘treacherous halls’?)
17 of 17