Here's a YouTube extract from a 1970s British TV show called Minder, where Arthur Daley, a crooked used car salesman is dealing with a complaint from a customer whose used car has started sprouting grass!
Arthur Daley handling a dissatisfied customer
(You'll need to scroll to 2:40 to hear the beginning of the complaint)
What do you think of the strategies being used?
By the way, most of the characters are speaking very broad Cockney - don't be surprised if you can't understand everything they're saying!
Saturday, 22 November 2008
Thursday, 20 November 2008
The In-Tray Exam
Doesn't time fly when you're enjoying yourself! It seems like it was yesterday we started this course on an early-autumn evening in Kalmar, and now it's almost time for the In-Tray exam.
The exam itself will appear on the web site on Friday. You'll find it in Module 4 on the In-Tray Exam page. You'll see another useful page there too: In-Tray Exam procedure. So … what exactly is an In-Tray, and why are you being examined about it?
Your in-tray is the tray on your desk where all the incoming documents are placed. As you work through them, you do your day's work! The In-Tray exam sees you as a temp (worker from a temporary agency, like Manpower) who's been taken on by the three companies in the course. You have to draft responses to various documents that have come in, or situations that have arisen. These responses are going to be in the form of letters of complaint and apology, an internal memo and a brief report.
The practicalities work like this:
• you open (or download) the .pdf document which is the exam booklet
• you choose the particular tasks you want to answer (remember that there are 16 alternatives - four for each company - but you only write four in total)
• you write the documents you need to write …
• and then send them to David, either as e-mail attachments or as print-outs which you put in an envelope (it helps if you put all your four answers into the same electronic document, if you're attaching it to an e-mail, but this isn't compulsory)
What happens then …
… is that I print the document out, mark it in green ink (because people have bad memories of red ink from school!), make specific comments on each task, give each task a mark … and finally send everything back to you. I'll send you a notification of your final result by e-mail, but the actual marked tasks, together with my detailed comments are sent back to whatever address we have for you - so make sure that you've let me know, if you've moved house since the course began in September.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to get back to me.
The exam itself will appear on the web site on Friday. You'll find it in Module 4 on the In-Tray Exam page. You'll see another useful page there too: In-Tray Exam procedure. So … what exactly is an In-Tray, and why are you being examined about it?
Your in-tray is the tray on your desk where all the incoming documents are placed. As you work through them, you do your day's work! The In-Tray exam sees you as a temp (worker from a temporary agency, like Manpower) who's been taken on by the three companies in the course. You have to draft responses to various documents that have come in, or situations that have arisen. These responses are going to be in the form of letters of complaint and apology, an internal memo and a brief report.
The practicalities work like this:
• you open (or download) the .pdf document which is the exam booklet
• you choose the particular tasks you want to answer (remember that there are 16 alternatives - four for each company - but you only write four in total)
• you write the documents you need to write …
• and then send them to David, either as e-mail attachments or as print-outs which you put in an envelope (it helps if you put all your four answers into the same electronic document, if you're attaching it to an e-mail, but this isn't compulsory)
What happens then …
… is that I print the document out, mark it in green ink (because people have bad memories of red ink from school!), make specific comments on each task, give each task a mark … and finally send everything back to you. I'll send you a notification of your final result by e-mail, but the actual marked tasks, together with my detailed comments are sent back to whatever address we have for you - so make sure that you've let me know, if you've moved house since the course began in September.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to get back to me.
Warm-Up 4
Warm-Up 4 doesn't give you any marks (!), but it is, perhaps, a way for you to see the collective wisdom of the group about two key areas in the In-Tray exam: complaining and apologising. Since you don't get any marks for it, you don't have to do it either - but I'm sure that your contributions will be gratefully received by everyone else, if you do!
Monday, 10 November 2008
Feedback on Warm-Up 3
I think I've just finished all the Warm-Up 3s - so if you've submitted yours, but not yet received feedback, please first check your mailbox … and then get back to me and I'll see what's happened to it!
Warm-Up 3 was also done very well, with most people navigating the shoals and quicksands of formal language in English very well. There are all sorts of pitfalls and traps for you to fall into, from choosing the right kind of formal vocabulary to avoiding using spoken language in formal reports. Here are a few hints and tips:
1. Don't start sentences with 'And' or 'But' in formal writing. They work in informal, internal memos and e-mails, but not in formal written documents.
2. Don't use short forms (like 'don't') in formal writing. Write the short form out in full instead (e.g. do not).
3. There are some words in everyday use which aren't sufficiently formal for more formal documents. Among these are 'get' (receive/become/obtain are three useful synonyms) and 'big' ('large' for size; 'great' or 'major' for importance). Using them can make you sound a little like a lightweight.
4. Then there's the difference between 'security' and 'safety'. The former is more existential and the latter more physical. Thus a 'security barrier' is designed to keep you hooligans in the crowd in your place (Kalmar's full of exuberant people this evening who need to be kept in place by security barriers).
A 'safety barrier' on the other hand is for your protection to stop you from falling off a high building.
5. The distinction (or rather sometime lack of distinction!) between 'damage' and 'damages' has come up. 'Damage' is physical harm done to an object or person. 'Damages' is the sum of money a court may make you pay if you cause damage (nb) to someone or something else. The Swedish for 'damage' is 'skada' and for 'damages', 'skadestånd'. You can imagine the confusion that might be caused by mixing them up.
In addition to this, 'damage' is something that's called an 'uncount noun' in the grammar books. We have quite a few people on the course this term who have as their native languages languages which don't have the same system of articles as Swedish and English, so here's an extended explanation for Lithuanians, Koreans and Chinese students, amongst others!
In English we divide nouns (names of things, people, emotions, etc) into two categories, 'count' and 'uncount', depending on whether we see the nouns as separated objects (like 'chairs') or as representatives of a more amorphous type of experience (like 'patriotism' or 'damage').
Count nouns have singulars and plurals; uncount nouns only have a singular form. This is why 'damages' has got to deal with the money, not with the damage, since the uncount noun 'damage' can't have a singular form.
Singular count nouns must have a word of the grammatical category of determiners in front of them. Determiners are words like a/the/my/this/another which tell you exactly which one of them you're talking about. Thus you can't say *I need chair* - you have to say "I need a chair" … or "…that chair"… or "… your chair", etc.
Uncount nouns, on the other hand, can stand without a determiner. Thus, "he did some damage to his knee … but without love and kindness it just festered until he could hardly walk"!
And … just to be really English … count nouns can stand without a determiner if they're in the plural! Thus: "Chairs are to be stacked on one another before leaving the classroom".
I always say that if English were easy, you wouldn't need teachers!
If anyone feels the need for further explanation of this point, please don't hesitate to get in touch.
Good luck with Send-In 3 this weekend.
Warm-Up 3 was also done very well, with most people navigating the shoals and quicksands of formal language in English very well. There are all sorts of pitfalls and traps for you to fall into, from choosing the right kind of formal vocabulary to avoiding using spoken language in formal reports. Here are a few hints and tips:
1. Don't start sentences with 'And' or 'But' in formal writing. They work in informal, internal memos and e-mails, but not in formal written documents.
2. Don't use short forms (like 'don't') in formal writing. Write the short form out in full instead (e.g. do not).
3. There are some words in everyday use which aren't sufficiently formal for more formal documents. Among these are 'get' (receive/become/obtain are three useful synonyms) and 'big' ('large' for size; 'great' or 'major' for importance). Using them can make you sound a little like a lightweight.
4. Then there's the difference between 'security' and 'safety'. The former is more existential and the latter more physical. Thus a 'security barrier' is designed to keep you hooligans in the crowd in your place (Kalmar's full of exuberant people this evening who need to be kept in place by security barriers).
A 'safety barrier' on the other hand is for your protection to stop you from falling off a high building.
5. The distinction (or rather sometime lack of distinction!) between 'damage' and 'damages' has come up. 'Damage' is physical harm done to an object or person. 'Damages' is the sum of money a court may make you pay if you cause damage (nb) to someone or something else. The Swedish for 'damage' is 'skada' and for 'damages', 'skadestånd'. You can imagine the confusion that might be caused by mixing them up.
In addition to this, 'damage' is something that's called an 'uncount noun' in the grammar books. We have quite a few people on the course this term who have as their native languages languages which don't have the same system of articles as Swedish and English, so here's an extended explanation for Lithuanians, Koreans and Chinese students, amongst others!
In English we divide nouns (names of things, people, emotions, etc) into two categories, 'count' and 'uncount', depending on whether we see the nouns as separated objects (like 'chairs') or as representatives of a more amorphous type of experience (like 'patriotism' or 'damage').
Count nouns have singulars and plurals; uncount nouns only have a singular form. This is why 'damages' has got to deal with the money, not with the damage, since the uncount noun 'damage' can't have a singular form.
Singular count nouns must have a word of the grammatical category of determiners in front of them. Determiners are words like a/the/my/this/another which tell you exactly which one of them you're talking about. Thus you can't say *I need chair* - you have to say "I need a chair" … or "…that chair"… or "… your chair", etc.
Uncount nouns, on the other hand, can stand without a determiner. Thus, "he did some damage to his knee … but without love and kindness it just festered until he could hardly walk"!
And … just to be really English … count nouns can stand without a determiner if they're in the plural! Thus: "Chairs are to be stacked on one another before leaving the classroom".
I always say that if English were easy, you wouldn't need teachers!
If anyone feels the need for further explanation of this point, please don't hesitate to get in touch.
Good luck with Send-In 3 this weekend.
Monday, 27 October 2008
Warm-Up 3
Warm-Up 3 is all about turning informal, spoken language into formal, written language. The prompt is the kind of thing a health-and-safety officer might say when he's on a site visit, but the written version of his recommendations will use different grammatical structures and different words.
Remember that you've only got FIVE sentences to produce - you don't need to write the entire report.
Remember that you've only got FIVE sentences to produce - you don't need to write the entire report.
Thursday, 23 October 2008
Feedback on Warm-Up 2
I think I've now marked everyone's Warm-Up 2 tasks. If you've sent yours in, but not received any feedback, please let me know.
You handled the task very well, in general. Most people avoided the temptation to score points, which is smart, but concentrated instead on describing what happened calmly and factually. What many of you needed to work on, though, was formulating your demands clearly - so that the US company can just pay you what you want and get rid of you! In other words, a clear statement of what would make you happy is probably all you need in a case like this - the US company won't mind paying you (it's such a small sum that the administration alone costs them more).
There were some language points which recurred, and here's an explanation of the ones I think lots of people need to be careful with:
1. The word 'inconveniences' ought to exist … but it doesn't! There's a grammatical distinction between words which identify individual items (e.g. 'chair') and ones which describe general phenomena (e.g. 'inconvenience'). The point is that the words in the second category don't have plural forms, so you can't put an 's' on the end of 'inconvenience'.
2. Colloquial language is the language of speech, not of writing. Everyone knows that 'quid' and 'buck' are the everyday, spoken names of the currencies of the UK and the US, but we write 'pounds' and 'dollars' in contracts. 'Get' is one of these colloquial expressions - avoid it if you can when writing formal letters.
3. Prepositions are always tricky. 'In', 'on' and 'at' are particularly so. Here's a trick that works nearly all the time:
When you're talking about places and periods of time, 'in' is for the largest unit, 'on' for a smaller one and 'at' for a point in space or a point in time. Thus, it's 'in 2009', 'on Monday', 'at 8.00 am' and it's 'in Sweden', 'on Storgatan' and 'at no. 29 Storgatan'.
4. The verb 'appreciate' has been causing problems. When you use the word on its own, it means 'increase in value' (my house appreciated by 10% last year). When you want it to mean an expression of gratefulness, it needs an object (like 'it'). I.e. "I would appreciate it if you would …"
5. Be careful with 'would' and 'should'. "Your representative told me that I should receive a discount" is actually saying that the guy is hoping and speculating - not making any kind of firm undertaking. Change 'should' to 'would' and it becomes a promise.
6. Short forms have been causing problems. 'I'm', 'don't', 'can't', etc work very well in informal letters to people you know. You can't use them in formal letters though (I'm writing informally at the moment, which is why I don't write 'cannot'!).
If you'd like further explanation of any of these points, don't forget to ask!
You handled the task very well, in general. Most people avoided the temptation to score points, which is smart, but concentrated instead on describing what happened calmly and factually. What many of you needed to work on, though, was formulating your demands clearly - so that the US company can just pay you what you want and get rid of you! In other words, a clear statement of what would make you happy is probably all you need in a case like this - the US company won't mind paying you (it's such a small sum that the administration alone costs them more).
There were some language points which recurred, and here's an explanation of the ones I think lots of people need to be careful with:
1. The word 'inconveniences' ought to exist … but it doesn't! There's a grammatical distinction between words which identify individual items (e.g. 'chair') and ones which describe general phenomena (e.g. 'inconvenience'). The point is that the words in the second category don't have plural forms, so you can't put an 's' on the end of 'inconvenience'.
2. Colloquial language is the language of speech, not of writing. Everyone knows that 'quid' and 'buck' are the everyday, spoken names of the currencies of the UK and the US, but we write 'pounds' and 'dollars' in contracts. 'Get' is one of these colloquial expressions - avoid it if you can when writing formal letters.
3. Prepositions are always tricky. 'In', 'on' and 'at' are particularly so. Here's a trick that works nearly all the time:
When you're talking about places and periods of time, 'in' is for the largest unit, 'on' for a smaller one and 'at' for a point in space or a point in time. Thus, it's 'in 2009', 'on Monday', 'at 8.00 am' and it's 'in Sweden', 'on Storgatan' and 'at no. 29 Storgatan'.
4. The verb 'appreciate' has been causing problems. When you use the word on its own, it means 'increase in value' (my house appreciated by 10% last year). When you want it to mean an expression of gratefulness, it needs an object (like 'it'). I.e. "I would appreciate it if you would …"
5. Be careful with 'would' and 'should'. "Your representative told me that I should receive a discount" is actually saying that the guy is hoping and speculating - not making any kind of firm undertaking. Change 'should' to 'would' and it becomes a promise.
6. Short forms have been causing problems. 'I'm', 'don't', 'can't', etc work very well in informal letters to people you know. You can't use them in formal letters though (I'm writing informally at the moment, which is why I don't write 'cannot'!).
If you'd like further explanation of any of these points, don't forget to ask!
Tuesday, 30 September 2008
Warm-Up 2
Warm-Up 2 is all about complaining. 'The Hire Car from Hell' is all about really bad treatment when renting a car in the USA. The idea for this Warm-Up came from the wonderful film, "Trains and Planes and Automobiles", with Steve Martin and John Candy. The task is set up so that you don't have any other option than to write a well-composed letter to the company in the USA - and hope for the best. The sum of money involved is too small to make it worth your while starting a legal action (at least from this side of the Atlantic - it'd be different if you were living in the USA, where they have Small Claims Courts). There's also a lot of scope for 'he said-she said' situations (which is how they describe situations where one person says one thing, and the other person says something different in American English).
The task itself is quite limited: you only have to write FIVE sentences from the letter you'd write (i.e. NOT the entire letter). The point is to see whether you can calibrate your language, so that you express yourself firmly, but refrain from insults and gratuitous comments that will just result in your letter being filed in the trash can! Once again, there's a link to the Send-In Task which comes next.
You submit your Warm-Up Task 2 by copying your text into a comment. Remember to include FIVE sentences only - and to include your name in the submission.
By the way, an FAQ for this task is: what's a 'redeye'? If you'd like to know, take a look at the first comment on this blog post.
The task itself is quite limited: you only have to write FIVE sentences from the letter you'd write (i.e. NOT the entire letter). The point is to see whether you can calibrate your language, so that you express yourself firmly, but refrain from insults and gratuitous comments that will just result in your letter being filed in the trash can! Once again, there's a link to the Send-In Task which comes next.
You submit your Warm-Up Task 2 by copying your text into a comment. Remember to include FIVE sentences only - and to include your name in the submission.
By the way, an FAQ for this task is: what's a 'redeye'? If you'd like to know, take a look at the first comment on this blog post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
