GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS
ENGLISH LANGUAGE
AS/Advanced
SUMMER 2014
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
Grade boundary information for this subject is available on the WJEC public website at:
https://www.wjecservices.co.uk/MarkToUMS/default.aspx?l=en
Online results analysis
WJEC provides information to examination centres via the WJEC secure website. This is
restricted to centre staff only. Access is granted to centre staff by the Examinations Officer
at the centre.
Annual Statistical Report
The annual Statistical Report (issued in the second half of the Autumn Term) gives overall
outcomes of all examinations administered by WJEC.
Unit
Page
LG1
1
LG2
4
LG3
7
LG4
10
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
ENGLISH LANGUAGE
General Certificate of Education
SUMMER 2014
Advanced Subsidiary
LG1: Introduction to the Language of Texts
Principal Examiner:
Kristina Petrova-Hill
On the whole, candidates were well prepared for this unit. Their analysis showed a mostly
sound understanding of the assessment objectives; some candidates presented an ability
to score precise analytical points, unpicking specific aspects of language. The choice of
texts proved accessible, enabling strong candidates to obtain the higher marks, whilst
giving enough opportunities for less capable candidates to construct often sensible
discussions.
Section A: The Language of Texts
Candidates were asked to analyse two extracts from university promotional materials. One
was an extract from Leeds Metropolitan University’s website, which publicised the university
to a diverse range of applicants in an informal and friendly manner. The second text, an
extract from Portsmouth University’s online prospectus, was slightly more formal and also
focused on social aspects of student life in the city. Characteristic of both texts was the way
in which they used language to present their respective cities as attractive to potential
students.
Most candidates demonstrated a firm understanding of the context of both website extracts,
and produced some insightful comments on Leeds Metropolitan University’s informal
approach and emphasis on multiculturalism and versatility. Stronger candidates were able
to deduce that, despite the similarity in purpose and audience, Portsmouth University’s
website placed more emphasis on the city’s idyllic coastal location and tradition.
Text A, ‘Life in Leeds’, addressed its audience by emphasising the vibrant nature of student
life at the university, establishing a direct, almost conversational rapport with potential
students. The majority of candidates were clearly well prepared for analysing such a text
and demonstrated an increasingly detailed knowledge of the conventions of such
promotional publications. Several candidates successfully discussed the connotations of
the adjective ‘vibrant’ and the metaphor in the noun phrase ‘student haven’. Furthermore,
strong candidates discussed the wide range of social opportunities available in Leeds, and
sensibly selected the noun phrases ‘funky retro haunts’ and ‘cool sophisticated
rendezvous’, making valid points about how the writer was targeting a number of different
social groups.
Most candidates were able to identify specific language features, using terminology
accurately. However, some candidates did suffer due a tendency to make generic claims
about the intentions of the writer to ‘make the reader read on’. Other candidates made valid
but underdeveloped points about the friendly tenor of the text, and weaker candidates
digressed in discussions about the difficulties of student finance. In some cases,
terminology was not always used enough, particularly in the identification of syndetic and
asyndetic lists, and where these particular structural features were mentioned, they were
often followed by generic comments about such lists being there to ‘intrigue the reader’ as
they ‘get information across quickly’.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
1
Whilst many strong candidates explored the use of subordinate conditional clauses to
analyse the writer’s flexibility in approach, weaker candidates failed to select such more
complex grammatical patterns and engaged in some feature spotting, which is
discouraged. Further lack of precision prevented some candidates from gaining higher
marks. Post-modification is still misunderstood. In the case of the clause ‘Leeds is
beautiful’, where the adjective ‘beautiful’ is a complement, it was often mislabelled as a
post-modifier. A further issue which caused confusion was the quite prevalent discussion
of anaphoric and cataphoric references, in cases where repetition was the more
appropriate term. Finally, many candidates spent too long exploring the graphology or
layout of the text, instead of engaging with more fruitful features such as the parenthetical
voice used by the writer, and the range of imperatives and adverbials.
Text B, ‘Portsmouth Experience’, presented some subtle opportunities for discussing
Portsmouth University’s geographical location, advantageous to travel to London and the
continent. Strong candidates explored the city’s historical appeal, with links to famous
writers and engineers. There was some insightful discussion of verb choices with casual
connotations, such as ‘meander’ and ‘wander’, as well as of the writer’s use of the
imperative mood in the final paragraph, which offered a range of suggestions on how
students could spend their free time. Some errors were particularly common here, and
worth bearing in mind when preparing future candidates for this examination. Candidates
still used the term ‘phrase’ to refer to any aspect of language; they would gain higher marks
if they were able to be more precise, such as ‘noun phrase’ or ‘prepositional phrase’.
Candidates also need to show an awareness of the difference between phrases and
clauses. It is always worth reminding candidates that generic terms such as word, lexis or
lexeme are not precise enough. There was also some incorrect reference to the noun
phrase ‘compact city’ as being alliterative, and this often led to bland comments such as ‘it
creates an attractive vibe’. The terms ‘idiom’ and ‘collocation’ were used too loosely to refer
to any phrase they could identify. There seemed to be a tendency for students to hedge
their bets in labelling sentences as ‘compound-complex’ in the hope that at least one might
be correct. The first sentence of Text A, ‘We are delighted you are considering studying at
Leeds’, is not a simple sentence.
Imprecise quotation remains a problem for some candidates. It is not possible for an
examiner to assess the validity of a claim made when the only quoted evidence offered is
‘the relative clause “which” shows…’ In addition, candidates quoted and mislabelled word
classes out of context. For example, in Text A the pre modifying adjective ‘growing’ in the
noun phrase ‘growing international community’ was often labelled as a verb. And in Text B,
the noun ‘walk’ from the noun phrase ‘a short walk’ was also referred to as a verb. It is
also recommended that candidates proofread their spelling. ‘Persuade’ was often spelled
incorrectly, and ‘connotates’ was often used where ‘connotes’ would have been correct.
Some weaker candidates spent extensive sections of their responses on contractions,
which was excessive. Line references accompanying quotations are useful; however, the
best way for candidates to ensure that their point is fully rewarded is to underline the
specific feature they are exploring, if the quotation is longer.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
2
Section B: Language Focus
Section B produced many highly successful responses and it was clear that candidates
had been appropriately advised by centres of the need to apportion their time according to
the marks available. Whilst some candidates still evidently prefer to open their answers
with an overview of the texts, stronger responses demonstrated a tight focus on Robert
Pollard’s excitement and enthusiasm about Manchester City and its players.
Interestingly, candidates who knew a lot about football tended to digress. One statement
that stands out is that Pollard ‘doesn’t mention anything of Aguero scoring in the 93rd
minute, which I thought should have been mentioned’. The most able candidates
maintained full focus on Pollard’s delight that Manchester City had won their league title in
44 years. Insightful responses tracked the subtle variation in tone demonstrated by
Pollard’s recognition that the team’s earlier performance had been embarrassing, which is
superseded by their dramatic win on the final day of the season against Queen’s Park
Rangers.
Candidates are encouraged to be highly selective in their approach to this section, and to
concentrate their discussion on linguistic features relevant to the focus. Many strong
candidates explored the writer’s use of superlatives to enhance the drama of the game, and
scored points in selecting and analysing Pollard’s use of unusual syntax in the fronted
adverbial ‘Never will there be a final day…’ and fronted coordinating conjunction ‘But all that
was forgotten…’. Insightful candidates discussed the writer’s subversion of expectations in
the clause ‘to grab defeat from the jaws of victory’.
One common feature of many less successful answers was the lack of precision in tackling
linguistic features. For example, the adjective ‘hungry’ was often described as a ‘stative
verb’, and the fronted adverb ‘However’ was often referred to as a ‘fronted conjunction’. It
is worth reminding candidates that not every sentence which contains the coordinating
conjunction ‘and’ is a compound sentence. ‘They were young and hungry for success’ is
not a compound sentence.
Some candidates used the term ‘utterance’, which belongs to spoken analysis, and others
slipped in their focus by discussing the parenthetical structure ‘beat Sunderland away’,
which was used by Pollard in reference to Manchester United, not Manchester City. Much
sensible discussion was made of the writer’s admiration for Vincent Kompany, and the
metaphor in the clause ‘grows in stature every day’, as well as the ‘spine’ metaphor in
reference to the most important players in the team. As in Text A, some quotations featured
out of context, such as the pre-modifying adjective ‘tiring’ in the noun phrase ‘tiring
campaign’ was often mislabelled as a ‘verb’.
The text provided opportunities for some often insightful and imaginative exploration of
Pollard’s excitement and enthusiasm for Manchester City’s new-found success.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
3
ENGLISH LANGUAGE
General Certificate of Education
SUMMER 2014
Advanced Subsidiary
LG2: Original Writing and Exploring Spoken Language
Principal Examiner:
Jane Martin
As we move towards the end of this specification, it is useful to reflect on the immense
variety and richness of the individual pieces candidates produce. As in previous years, the
majority of candidates took the opportunity to craft original pieces, illuminated by applied
linguistic knowledge, and to gain and demonstrate research skills and understanding in the
analysis of spoken language. Moderators recognise and appreciate, in many comments, the
stimulating guidance and critical support teachers give to their students during coursework
production.
Most centres are well acquainted with the specification but there have been a few changes
over time. Please can I ask everyone involved in the delivery of this AS unit to visit the
guidance relating to word count on the WJEC website. Although the prescribed word counts
have been in place for a while, not all centres are insisting candidates meet these. Where
the advised count is exceeded, assessment should stop at the limit plus 10%. For Section A,
the creative piece should be 1,000 words (1100 max), the commentary 750 words (825 max)
and for Section B, 1500 words (1,650 max). Candidates should be advised to develop and
edit their work as closely as possible to these lengths. There is also a requirement to add a
cumulative word count at the bottom of each page. This assists candidates in structuring and
drafting their work as well as aiding assessors and moderators.
Many coversheets were submitted with some incomplete elements. The current coversheet
can be downloaded from the WJEC website and the centre name and number filled in before
distribution. The front should be fully completed by the candidate. As well as the two words
counts for Section A, the genre (dystopia, romance etc.) and form (short story, opening
chapter, monologue, etc.) are required. Many omitted to fill in the title which missed an
opportunity to give the reader a hint of what’s coming. For Section B, the ‘Chosen area of the
media’ requires candidates to give the genre (interview, chatshow, filmscript, etc.) as well as
details of the programme(s). The title should indicate the candidate’s approach e.g. ‘How is
dominance established in a Jeremy Paxman interview?’ or ‘How are features of spontaneous
speech used to create naturalism in an episode of Friends?’. Too many this year just stated
‘Analysis’ or even ‘Coursework’.
The assessment side of the coversheet should be completed by the teacher(s). Summative,
evaluative comments referring to the appropriate AOs and band descriptors are required.
Teachers should also annotate the work itself, indicating not only accurately made points but
also lapses in expression or errors in the use of terminology. If these are not marked,
moderators are unsure if they have been taken into account in assessment and this is the
most commonly cited issue in reports where there are differences in moderation. Most
centres are able to undertake effective internal moderation and marks are frequently
changed during this process. Where this happens, please explain the key reasons briefly as,
at times, summative comments on a folder indicated a specific level of achievement yet the
mark may have been changed significantly without further justification. On occasions,
moderators note that this practice can lead to grade inflation.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
4
Section A: Original Writing
Haunting situations, engaging characters and evocative snatches of succinct dialogue
remain with the readers of the candidates’ original pieces. The best are a delight, a
testament to the skills and knowledge of the writers, demonstrating control, expertise and a
genuine engagement of their audience. This year there was, however, a tendency towards
more extreme plots, with many favouring horror, gothic, dystopian and crime styles. In the
prescribed length of 1,000 words, it is challenging to create a complete story in these genres
that establishes credible details and candidates would often be better advised to compose
opening chapters or an extract. Preparation should include study of a range of examples
from their chosen genre or style but the features identified should offer stimuli to their own
ideas rather than a list for inclusion, which seemed to be the case in some weaker pieces.
A good commentary explores the language the candidate has chosen to create their original
piece. The best of these illuminated the writing with a clear analysis of how meaning had
been created and a discussion of intended stylistic effects, using linguistic terminology and
apt supporting examples,. Even if the writing was not fully successful, the section was often
lifted by showing that challenging stylistic techniques had been used consciously, such as
changes in tense or viewpoint. Candidates should remember, however, that the reader is
now familiar with the story and the narrative does not need to be described.
As with all coursework, please encourage candidates to proof-read and check this section
thoroughly; many lost marks through careless lapses in spelling, expression and
misidentification of features.
Section B: Exploring Spoken Language of the Media
A wide range of material had been chosen for investigation in this section and it was good to
see radio featuring as well as television programmes. One recurring favourite was the
confrontational Russell Brand/Jeremy Paxman Newsnight interview which was rich in
features for sophisticated discussion. Teachers had again done a truly impressive job in
guiding candidates to select, transcribe and investigate such a variety.
Most candidates used accurate transcript annotations and numbered lines but a significant
minority still omit these. Although the transcript is not assessed separately, the process of
individually listening to, selecting and transcribing data gives a fundamental understanding of
how language is being used, which was very evident in informing most of the analyses. The
transcript should be placed before the analysis as the reader needs familiarity with the
material. It should be preceded by a key to annotations used and there is an opportunity
here to give a brief contextual explanation as is now practised in several centres. This does
not then need to be repeated in the analysis, allowing the candidate to move straight into
discussion of the implications of the context in dictating or interpreting linguistic usage.
The most successful pieces had a focused approach, often a response to a precise
interrogative title. Knowledge of theoretical studies is helpful but, in this limited task, there is
usually insufficient evidence to prove or disprove a theory. References to theory distorted the
exploration of the data in some cases and were best used in support of the candidate’s own
observations.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
5
Some Administrative Points
Moderators report that most centres manage the assessment procedure and submission of
samples very well. There are, however, some common issues which cause problems and it
would be appreciated if centres could check that:

Candidates' marks are entered accurately.

Cover sheets are current. These can be downloaded from the WJEC website.

Cover sheets are completed fully by both the candidate and teacher, with the accurate
completion of all three word count boxes and a cumulative total noted on each page.

Candidates' folders are firmly secured in the correct order:
Cover sheet/ assessment sheet;
Section A with the creative piece preceding the commentary;
Section B with the annotation key and transcript(s) preceding the analysis.

Every folder has the candidate's and teacher's signature on the declarations.

The required sample folders are sent to the moderator by the due date.
Moderators regularly report how much they enjoy reading the candidates’ work and
acknowledge and appreciate the hard work of teachers in guidance and assessment. The
frequently high standard of linguistic understanding reflects how much candidates gain in
producing this substantial body of work over a sustained period. In the majority of centres,
assessment is accurate, supported by thoughtful and careful annotation and application of
the assessment objectives and band criteria.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
6
ENGLISH LANGUAGE
General Certificate of Education
SUMMER 2014
Advanced
LG3: Language Investigation and Writing for Specific Purposes and Audiences
Principal Examiner:
Elizabeth Hughes
It is pleasing to note that the majority of centres clearly understand the requirements of the
unit and most allow candidates real independence in approaching their studies and functional
writing, although candidates in some centres continue to use the same material and /or similar
approaches. This has been mentioned in previous reports and it is disappointing to see the
few cases, where this is continuing to happen. When candidates from a centre use the same
data for Section A (even if the focus of their studies is different) there are inevitably similarities
in the completed pieces. In Section B, some centres are still encouraging the whole cohort to
use the same genre when producing their writing. Ideally, candidates should select their own
individual focus and data for their investigation and also be allowed to follow their own
interests when choosing a specific purpose and audience to write for.
There were some problems with word limits this year, despite this having been mentioned in a
number of previous reports. Some centres are allowing candidates to produce far more than
the maximum word tolerance. In Section A, this sometimes resulted in investigations being up
to twice the prescribed word limit. An ability to be able to draft and edit is a skill that
candidates are required to master in this section. In Section B, some pieces were well below
the specified word limit. This was also true of some commentaries. It is important that
candidates adhere to the specified word limits in order to produce effective writing and
detailed linguistic discussion. Candidates are required to include cumulative word counts
throughout their work and those that did so seemed to have few problems with word limits. It
is pleasing to note that some centres indicated on their candidates’ work that assessment had
stopped when the word limits had been reached.
There were very few administrative problems this year with just a small minority of marks
being entered incorrectly. However, some centres are continuing to use outdated cover
sheets. The latest version (which is available on the WJEC website) has been in use for a
number of years now and requires more information to be entered than the previous versions.
It is good to note the rigorous approach to assessment applied by the majority of centres.
Comments on the cover sheets, and on the pieces themselves, were often detailed and linked
to the assessment objectives, which of course are different for the two sections. Some
centres, however, are not including summative comments on the cover sheets, which is a
WJEC requirement, whilst others merely use ticks with no annotation. It is important that
moderators are able to understand why and how marks have been awarded. There is still a
tendency for over-positive marking in some centres, with every term being ticked whether it is
correct or not. Cross-moderation was evident in the majority of centres where candidates are
taught by two or more teachers. It would be useful for the moderator if a brief comment could
be included explaining why marks have been changed, if this has happened.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
7
Section A: Language Investigation
As to be expected in this synoptic unit, there was a wide range of enlightening and interesting
investigations. As always gender and politics were both very popular with candidates, who
continue to approach these areas with originality. There were also some wide ranging and
successful investigations into aspects of Language from the Past. There were less problems
with both the imposition and description of theory this year and studies were generally well
organised, although some centres are still encouraging candidates to include lengthy and
often unnecessary introductions setting out their methodology. This year, advertisements
tended to be used more effectively by candidates, mainly because the texts chosen were rich
in language features. In previous years, there has sometimes been too much analysis of
layout and/or images despite these not being linguistic features. A number of successful
studies were focused upon accent and/or dialect, with some fascinating primary data being
collected and analysed. The following titles give an idea as to some of the diverse approaches
used by candidates this year:






A comparison of gendered language found in The Boy’s Book of Adventure and The Great
Big Glorious Book for Girls.
Slavery texts from 1680 and 1785.
An analysis of Coca Cola advertisements over time.
Gender and crime reporting.
Gender theory applied to television interview transcripts.
Gendered language used to undermine masculinity in boxing commentaries.
As always some studies lacked a clear focus or were unrealistically broad. This was often the
case with candidates who were allowed to ignore the areas of language study on the
prescribed list. Candidates should be made aware that broad areas such as Political
Language and Language and Power are not allowable. The following areas chosen by some
candidates this year do not appear on the prescribed list:







Language Change
Child Development
Advertising
Language of the Media
Taboo Language
The Language of Love
Racism
It is a requirement that candidates have to place their studies into one of the prescribed areas,
which helps to give their study a tighter focus. All of the above could have been placed
correctly into a prescribed area, which would have resulted in the studies having clearer
focuses. It was worrying to note that one centre allowed all candidates to use the same data
i.e. a selection of charity leaflets, as a basis for their investigations. Finally some candidates
produced work that would have fitted better into the AS unit Exploring Spoken Language as
the data sometimes consisted of very short transcripts, which did not provide the depth or
breadth required by this synoptic unit.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
8
Section B: Writing for Specific Purposes and Audiences
It is always pleasing to see the range of expertise shown in this section, with the best pieces
reaching a truly professional level. The majority of candidates were able to produce functional
writing appropriate for the purpose and context of their chosen piece. Unfortunately, this was
not the case with specific audience, as an awareness of this did not always appear to be
present. However, candidates were generally able to discuss both the distinctive features of
their chosen genre, their linguistic choices and their use of language. Travel writing, as in
previous years, was very successfully done and it was clear that candidates often used
personal experiences, some good and some hilariously bad. Many candidates chose to
produce reviews ranging from restaurants to cars and there was a range of interesting articles.
One candidate successfully produced a section from a children’s text book using the Horrible
Histories approach. Others, however, seemed to have very little idea regarding KS3 language
use. Editorials and polemics tended to work well.
Assessment was often well judged, although a minority of centres awarded quite high marks
for commentaries, despite a lack of linguistic analysis. There were some problems with length
with some very short pieces and/or commentaries. Candidates should be encouraged to make
use of the words available to them.
General Points

It is a specification requirement to include meaningful annotation in the body of the work to
indicate to the moderator how marks have been awarded by the centre.

Please use the correct cover sheets which may be downloaded from the WJEC website.

Candidates must select from the prescribed list and indicate their choice on the cover
sheet.

Candidates must include cumulative word counts throughout their work.

Cover sheets must be signed by both candidates and teachers.

Folders should be assembled with the sections in the correct order with any additional
material placed at the back.
Finally, we would like to congratulate centres for all the hard work they’ve put into making this
unit so successful. As always, it has been a pleasure to read the sophisticated studies and
engaging writing produced by your candidates.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
9
ENGLISH LANGUAGE
General Certificate of Education
SUMMER 2014
Advanced
LG4: Analysing and Evaluating Language Modes and Contexts
Principal Examiner:
Sara Thorne
The texts provided candidates with plenty of material for discussion and most took advantage
of this to demonstrate their knowledge of spoken concepts in Section A and historical features
in Section B. Even where the period texts in Section B offered more of a challenge, many
candidates took the opportunity to show their wider understanding of contextual factors. At all
levels, the most effective responses were able to use details from the texts to support
analysis. Scripts that deal only with the bigger picture, making minimal references to the texts
themselves, do not fulfil the requirements of AO2 (analysis of meanings) or AO3 (evaluation of
production and reception). There should be evidence that the texts have been read carefully,
with examples and references used to support points made, and relevant linguistic
frameworks and appropriate terminology applied.
Introductions are now, in the main, engaging with the extracts from the start. There are still,
however, candidates who spend half a page or more considering their ‘expectations’, listing
what they expect to find without providing any examples.
“Since this speech is spontaneous, I would expect there to be many non-fluency
features present. Examples of these include fillers, pauses, hesitations and overlaps.”
Often general points like these are not developed later, and candidates are thus losing
opportunities to demonstrate their understanding. It is difficult to reward the use of terms
without supporting evidence since AO1 requires candidates to ‘apply’ knowledge, AO2
requires them to look at the effect on meaning, and AO3 requires them to ‘analyse and
evaluate’.
Another area which is taking up valuable examination time is over-extensive analysis of
pronouns – there also continues to be a general confusion between pronouns and
determiners. It is fair to say that the first person plural ‘we’ is inclusive in its reference (for
instance, in creating a sense of a united family in Section A, Text A), and that the first person
singular is self-referential (for instance, in establishing personal memories in Section A, Text
A). It is less useful, however, to suggest that first and second person pronouns demonstrate
that the participants are related, since these references are how all participants refer to
themselves or each other in conversation. The best advice to candidates is to avoid writing
whole paragraphs (of sometimes more than half a page) on pronoun referencing, and to build
relevant points into the wider argument.
A similar case can be argued for dependent and independent clauses. These are convenient
broad terms, but should be used with discretion – particularly since candidates often do not
quote the complete grammatical structure, thus rendering their labelling inaccurate. When
they are used to cover every quotation from the text, the analysis becomes repetitive, with
little sense of terms being chosen for their relevance to the point being made.
What is always rewarding is seeing what candidates of all levels can achieve within a very
tight time scale. All personal engagement with the texts results in individual interpretations of
meaning that can be credited - where this is accompanied by linguistic analysis and clear
expression of ideas, the responses are an excellent reflection of the hard work candidates and
teachers undertake in preparing for this unit.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
10
Section A
Analysis of Spoken Language: Informal conversations
All candidates seemed to be happy working with these texts. They found a range of features
to discuss and most were able to engage with the effect of context on language use. There
was some debate over the relative formality of Text A and the potential level of pre-scripting,
but most interpretations were valid on some level. Decisions about the informality of Text B
were more straightforward with all candidates agreeing about the intimate and familiar nature
of the discourse. Most candidates were also successful in recognising the importance of
deixis in Text A, making effective references to the external context which formed part of the
visual experience for a viewing audience.
Informal features such as elision, unintentional repetition, fillers and overlaps were easily
identified, and many candidates tried to move beyond observation to explore why there were
non-fluency features and to consider their effects. There was also some useful discussion of
pauses with candidates trying to explore their function in specific examples. In Text A, many
recognised the audible exhalation of breath (Text A, l.22) as marking thinking time and timed
pauses (Text A, ll.24/37) as marking a more physical change of direction (for instance,
where the participants perhaps move to look at a new photograph). There was less
confidence in dealing with pauses functioning as grammatical signposts to mark the end of
an utterance (e.g. Text A, l.20; Text B, l.6).
It was good to see that discussion of prosodics often went beyond basic recognition of
‘words that are important’. Many candidates were able to suggest that emphatic stress on
possessive determiners helped John Barnes’ mother to establish familial relationships (both
for the immediate and extended audience); and that emphatic stress on dynamic verbs and
the stretched phonemes in adverbs allowed Uncle Freddy to dramatise the story he was
telling for a younger listener. Where prosodic features are directly tied to meaning there is
clear evidence of both AO1 (using appropriate terminology) and AO2 (analysing and
evaluating the influence of contextual factors on the production of meaning).
References to theory were mostly neat and concise. Gender theory was effectively applied in
Text A – particularly where candidates were able to recognise that traditional expectations
(‘males interrupt’; ‘women provide affirmation and support’) are not met here. In the best
responses, candidates could provide examples and explore the effect of the context (for
instance, John Barnes provides back channel affirmation to support his mother in her role as
information-giver; interruptions are used co-operatively by both participants, and are not
associated with a challenge to the floor). Grice was used to make general points about the
turn-taking and the quality of the information provided. Where candidates claimed that Uncle
Freddy flouted the maxim of quantity or that John Barnes’ mother flouted the maxim of
quality, the application of theory was less successful. Given the contexts, Uncle Freddy’s
extended turns are appropriate in an oral narrative, and hedging (about (.) ‘64, nearly four
and a half years, Text A) is acceptable in a discourse where exact information is less
important than establishing a relationship and creating a feeling of nostalgia.
The attempt to apply child language acquisition theory to Text B was more problematic.
There was much confusion about the level of linguistic expertise of a nine year old, with
many suggesting Charlotte was just past the telegraphic stage because of her minimal
responses – in spite of the fact that children are fluent in their native language within five or
six years. Some responses were significantly affected by the attempt to force Text B to fit
candidates’ general knowledge of child language acquisition. Where the approach was more
tentative, exploring the child’s inquisitiveness and her engagement with the oral narrative
through interrogatives and positive feedback, the analysis was more successful. There was
also some sensible discussion of Charlotte’s interruptions perhaps being considered ‘rude’ in
an older participant since they appear to flout Grice’s maxim of manner.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
11
References to Jamaican English were also often misguided. A number of candidates saw
normal non-fluency features as ‘mistakes’ made by a second language speaker, not
recognising that English is the official language of Jamaica, and the dominant written form.
Responses addressing some distinctive grammatical features of Jamaican English were on
stronger ground: for instance, the omission of copula verbs (this a bust of Frank) and,
perhaps, the omission of the dummy auxiliary in the question you remember much about
him? A common misconception was that the elided subordinating conjunction coz (typical of
informal spoken Standard English) was an example of Jamaican English.
It was surprising how many candidates had difficulties reading a transcript. This was
particularly noticeable when examples of incomplete utterances were cited. Many quoted
you were (2) he was very pleased … (Text A, l.20) as an example of a false start and
reformulation. In this case, however, the initial subject and verb were tied to the fronted
deictic adverb there referencing the picture of John Barnes in his bathrobe in line18. The
lines were physically separated on the page because of the back channel laughter which
overlapped the mother’s anecdote, but were grammatically linked. In informal conversation
where there are often overlaps, it is important to check where grammatical structures run
over lines which are not physically consecutive on the page.
The most successful responses at all levels managed to use appropriate terminology and
make meaningful references to the texts. In discussing topic shifts, for instance, candidates
who quoted discourse markers signposting a change of direction (e.g. well, Text B, l.19) and
who then went on to explore the semantic focus of the topics avoided making points that
were so general they could be referencing any extract. In this case, Uncle Freddy moves
from anecdotes about Charlotte’s mother learning to ride a bike and running down steep hills
to stories about himself and his brothers. Citing these textual details opens up opportunities
for wider discussion of Grice’s maxim of relevance (Freddy has moved beyond the definition
of topic established by Charlotte in the prepositional phrase about mummy) and of the
relationship between participants (Charlotte continues to provide co-operative feedback and
accepts the change of topic).
Some problems with terms

Interrogative - all utterances marked with a question mark were often described as
interrogative. The interrogative mood, however, is marked by an inversion of subject and
verb (was that a lot of money?). The dummy auxiliary ‘do’ is added where there is no
auxiliary or primary verb ‘to be’ (Ø you remember much about him?); utterances with no
verbs are minor, often marked by rising intonation (e.g. what else? … why?).

Dialect and accent - there was some confusion about the difference between dialect
(grammatical and lexical features) and accent (pronunciation) – in Text B, the elision in
present participles and the noun hoss were examples of accent; double negatives, the
omission of plural inflections (five pound) and the non-agreement of verbs (she say)
were examples of dialect.

Interrogative pronouns – these are ‘who’, ‘whom’, ‘whose’, ‘which’ and ‘what’; ‘why’
was frequently labelled as an interrogative pronoun, but is a wh-question word.

Slang – this is a distinctive form of language using informal words that are typically
restricted in use to a particular context or group of people e.g. urban youth speak ‘my
bad’ (sorry – my mistake) , ‘bare’ (a lot of), ‘sick’ (great, amazing, cool). Examples like
coz and ain’t cited from these texts are not slang, but examples of widespread colloquial
usage common in informal contexts.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
12

Convergence and divergence - there was some very loose application of these terms.
Discussion of the apparent convergence between John Barnes and his mother (ll.31-4)
was sensible because there was clear evidence of an older speaker adjusting speech
patterns to match those of a younger speaker to express a shared understanding. It was
also fair to suggest that Uncle Freddy adopts predominantly straightforward, often
monosyllabic, lexis to meet the needs of his young listener. In both cases, these are
choices made by the speaker to reflect a particular situation at a particular time.
References to accent and dialect as examples of divergence or convergence, however,
were less successful in this context since these are more likely to be distinctive fixed
features of Uncle Freddy’s speech.
Section B
Analysis of Written Language over Time: Novels
Fiction has not appeared on the paper for a number of years and it seemed a rich area for
candidates to explore – particularly since they studied and produced creative fictional writing
for their AS coursework. With the emphasis on linguistic techniques, the question gave a
broad base for discussion of the use of language and the linguistic choices made, distinctive
features of style and genre, and the effects created. Many responses demonstrated a good
understanding of genre, addressing the effects of first and third person narratives and the
creation of character.
On the whole, candidates made good use of the information provided to help them interpret
the extracts - although this was less successful where sections of the summaries were
copied out wholesale. There were noticeable problems with Text A. This was a challenging
text, but candidates of all levels who read carefully showed themselves capable of making
relevant points. The biggest problem seems to have been in identifying who is speaking.
This meant that many claims about the confident use of imperatives and modal auxiliaries as
examples of Jack Wilton’s ability to manipulate, and the use of noun phrases linked to selfworth (good seruice, good deedes, such estimation) as examples of Wilton’s arrogance and
his deceptive nature, were misplaced since they were actually spoken by the cider-maker.
Those who looked closely at the parenthetical quoting clauses were able to distinguish
between the speakers more effectively.
Even those who struggled with attribution were able to make effective wider points about the
historical features – although candidates should ensure they cover a reasonable range.
There were plenty of examples of orthographical variation (u/v interchange. i/y interchange,
appended –e, phonetic spelling, doubling, single consonants) and some candidates were
also able to identify more interesting features such as the inconsistency of spelling
(world/worlde; me/mee; Sidership/syder), the omission of apostrophes to mark possession
(mans friend), the archaic second person pronoun thee, and the third person –th inflection. A
few were also able to make the well-observed point that the structure of interrogatives was
inconsistent with both inversion (what sayd the king) and the dummy auxiliary (did hee
beleeue it) used. There was much useful discussion of dole as an example of semantic
change with a number of candidates making reference to both the denotation of the noun
(the popular name for the various kinds of weekly payments made from national and local
funds to the unemployed) and its connotations (the social stigma often attached to those in
receipt of the payment).
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
13
Text B caused fewer problems, although there were still a number of candidates who found it
difficult to work out who was speaking. There was some useful discussion about the
differences between the narrative voice in the opening paragraph and the direct speech –
with some implicitly describing Austen’s use of free indirect speech to communicate Anne’s
thoughts (although without the shorthand of the term). Most responses were able to select
appropriate quotation to support the positive presentation of Anne and the negative
presentation of her father and sister.
Some candidates wrote a whole paragraph working through the spelling features of Text A to
show that they are no longer present in Modern English (for instance, quoting Have as a
contrast to haue). This took up valuable time and did not show engagement with the text.
More effective analysis of features typical of the period was mainly focused on lexis (the
adjective gouty, the noun renter, and the reference to horses). While many recognised the
archaic negatives (need not, think not) and the use of acquaintance as an uncountable noun
with plural concord, they often struggled to describe the grammatical variation. References
to words which we now find very formal were often sensible, but many identified gout,
scrupulous and venture as examples of obsolete lexis.
Candidates were on secure ground with Text C and many responses showed a good
understanding of contemporary language change with appropriate references to accent and
dialect, Americanisms and informal spoken language features. Sensible reading of the
extract led to discussion of the distance between the characters and the defensive nature of
the girl supported by relevant linguistic analysis. Observations about the lack of standard
punctuation were often accompanied by at least some reference to intentionality, with the
best responses exploring the effects created and the link to characterisation.
Sometimes far too long is spent on the educational standards of readers and the high
intellect of the writers. This broad discussion tends to prevent candidates engaging with the
texts. Far more productive is discussion which demonstrates understanding, where
candidates explore meaning and create links between the texts. Candidates also need to be
aware that references to religion as a typical indication of period are not always relevant – in
these texts, the use of pray was not linked to religious supplication. In Text A, it is part of a
formal idiom (now obsolete) meaning to beseech or ask someone earnestly for something (I
pray thee); in Text B, it is an adverb used to add urgency, or deference to a request – now
archaic, it is sometimes used deliberately to add ironic politeness to a question or request.
Another common misunderstanding was that the formal adverb thus is an archaic pronoun.
Across all the texts, there was some sensible contextual discussion, which worked best
when kept brief and when related directly to the texts. For instance, the importance of the
monarch and patriotism in Text A was linked to the cider-maker’s fear when accused of
treason. The importance of status and social class in Text B was linked to the use of
honorifics and to the semantic field of social position (profession, embarrass, approve, level,
associate). In Text C, contextual points were made about the informalisation of language,
the importance of setting (fast food diner) and the ordinary nature of the characters. Where
candidates lose sight of the texts and write extended sections based on their general
historical knowledge of dictionaries, grammar books and broad events (e.g. the Great Vowel
Shift, the Industrial Revolution), it is more difficult to find points to reward. There is a
requirement that they demonstrate knowledge in AO2, but this knowledge should be ‘related
to the construction and analysis of meanings.’
Many candidates engaged with genre effectively. Points about the use of adverbs, modifiers
and figurative language gave candidates opportunities to discuss the linguistic techniques
used in all three texts to engage readers. Having observed key features, however, it is
important that candidates go on to explore their meaning in context. A few recognised the
‘he said-she said’ oral narrative style of Text A, but all candidates were able to link the use of
dramatic simple sentences and dynamic verbs to the crime-thriller genre in Text C. There
was also some effective use of spoken language concepts to explore the relationship
between the characters in Texts B and C.
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
14
Some problems with terms

Past Tense and past participle – these terms seem to be used interchangeably, with
little apparent understanding of their function. Past tense verbs stand alone in a simple
verb phrase; they are finite and thus could be changed to present tense and still make
sense in context (e.g. sayd, hopt, passed). Past participles in a verb phrase occur with
an auxiliary; they are non-finite and cannot be changed (e.g. haue done, hath conspired).

Exclamative – this term is used to describe a very narrow range of grammatical
structures which usually begin with ‘What’ (e.g. ‘What a fantastic party it was!’) and ‘How’
(e.g. ‘How good is that!’). The examples in Text B are exclamatory sentences or
exclamations (Captain Benwick and Louisa Musgrove! Gout and decrepitude!).

Fronting or foregrounding – there is only evidence of foregrounding where an
unexpected grammatical element (i.e. other than the subject) has been moved to the
front of the clause. While the opening of Text C is an example of a foregrounded
adverbial (After a while …), Text B is an unmarked sentence beginning with the subject
(Mary need not …).

Passive – this was often used to describe clauses with no direct action implied (Mary
need not have feared … It was almost too wonderful for belief …). The passive voice is
made up of the verb ‘to be’ and a past participle (Text A: I am bought & solde; Text B: I
am told). Where these examples were identified accurately, candidates were able to
make useful semantic points about the helplessness of the cider-maker, who is seen to
be manipulated by those around him, and the gossip-like tone of Elizabeth’s dialogue.

Proper nouns and vocatives – these are often used interchangeably, but do not
perform the same function. Proper nouns are names of specific people, places, times,
occasions, books etc. Vocatives are nouns used to attract the attention of the person(s)
to whom a sentence is addressed. In Text A, the noun phrases my wise young Wilton
and Tapster are used by the cider-maker to address people present in the social context.
In Text B, Mary, Lady Dalrymple, The Crofts are proper nouns used in direct speech to
refer to people who are not present; Sir Walter, Miss Elliot, Elizabeth are proper nouns
used in the third person narrative to refer to characters.
GCE Examiner’s Report English Language HT
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.
15
WJEC
245 Western Avenue
Cardiff CF5 2YX
Tel No 029 2026 5000
Fax 029 2057 5994
E-mail: [email protected]
website: www.wjec.co.uk
© WJEC CBAC Ltd.