The Student Room Group
Reply 1
on EMB2 i did questions 1 and 3

although i thought the gender question was stupid as you had to analyse someone elses analysis of gender issues :confused: . still managed ok i think though.


yes it wont be perfect, but i tried my best :smile:
For ENB2 I did 2 and 3...

It's kind of ironic how I didn't do the Myspace question after I've spent so much time on it instead of revising lol
Reply 3
I think I made some good points and some very very very bad points :s-smilie:
Oh well what's done is done! :biggrin:
Reply 4
Myspace question was alright, as was the occupation. Was hoping for a nice transcript for language and gender but oh well, just didn't choose that one.

Groupings were nice, nearly ran out of time on the second part. Alright exam overall.
Reply 5
About 4 1/2 /5 sides, split pretty equally between the two. Didn't seem like much, but its quality over quantity afterall.
Reply 6
structure for q 3 was a real toughie. They were very much tempting a waffly, imprecise discussion which purely narrated the article.

representation element of q2 may have thrown lots of people - for instance, the subject specific lexis wasn't for the purpose of showing authority, efficiency, etc, but instead for the purpose of authenticity within a television drama. the whole 'scripted conversation' side of things really complicated the 'context' side of things I thought.

Q1 simple and standard.
Reply 7
erm.... wrote 6 sides split about equally.


and no not many theorists, think i stuck a couple in each question. there wernt any really obvious theorists though.
Reply 8
pete165
structure for q 3 was a real toughie. They were very much tempting a waffly, imprecise discussion which purely narrated the article.

representation element of q2 may have thrown lots of people - for instance, the subject specific lexis wasn't for the purpose of showing authority, efficiency, etc, but instead for the purpose of authenticity within a television drama. the whole 'scripted conversation' side of things really complicated the 'context' side of things I thought.

Q1 simple and standard.


OH ******
I've just realised I totally forgot to bring in the fact that it's within a television drama!
****** ****** ****** ******
Oh well - that's my ENB2 paper down the toilet :frown:
Reply 9
I think the key think is thinking about both contexts together. e.g.

The text represented many typical features of occupational language, which relates to theory (Drew and Heritage, etc.) but an awareness of how it was represented was the key. So, for instance, you had few spontaneous non-fluency features in the talk, as a result of the scripting...
Reply 10
Which ones are thesE?
Unit one, 2 or 3?
I did Unit 3, genderlect etc, back in Jan got like a B I think.
So I did Unit 2 last thursday - Thats the analysis and transformation into your own text. I hated that. We hadnt practiced novels, we had only practiced like leaflets and letters and nonfiction books. So it came to analysing the novel extract i was like uh...crap. and then writing my own opening?!! I am baaddd at creative writing. I also didnt get all the stuff i needed in there, in my commentary or my analysis, needed more time. My time management in english exams is ****.

And I had Unit 2 today, analysis and political correctness essay, and again really bad time handling. I couldnt fit everything into my political correctness essay, managed to get in sapir whorf and examples though, thats what i always left out in the mocks. I think this analysis went well though.

So uh yeah xDd
Long postage.
Sorryyyy,
Reply 11
hmm, yeah an odd question in that it was almost asking for comment on the doctor's language and the interaction, but also on the representation. A bit of both contexts should suffice - I suppose the ideal was to look at the fact that the transcript showed many typical features of the doctor's language (authority, etc) but that the televisiual context limited/adapted this...
Reply 12
as long as you answered the question:

How does the text represent this occupation

you'll be fine I'm sure.
I did questions 1 and 2. Question 1 went well I think (hope...), and I touched on the limitations of the text due to it being scripted/televised for question 2, but I don't think I went into enough detail or explained myself clearly enough. It was more a case of talking about the jargon/specialised lexis that was used, and then saying how it was probably minimal so as not to exclude the audience - which seems to be the opposite of what others here have said (included so as to provide credibility in order for the audience to believe it!)

Oh well, will just have to wait and see.
Reply 14
bruisepristine
I did questions 1 and 2. Question 1 went well I think (hope...), and I touched on the limitations of the text due to it being scripted/televised for question 2, but I don't think I went into enough detail or explained myself clearly enough. It was more a case of talking about the jargon/specialised lexis that was used, and then saying how it was probably minimal so as not to exclude the audience - which seems to be the opposite of what others here have said (included so as to provide credibility in order for the audience to believe it!)

Oh well, will just have to wait and see.



it's a clear mix between the two - there were references for authenticity and to represent the efficiency needed in the operating room, but also moments where it was limited to keep a sense of clarity for both patient and watching audience. That, added to the watching professionals, made it a very complex one, contextually. Some recognition of the scripted side of things would be a feature of a decent response though, I think.
hey i did question 1 n 3 on ENB2 hope it went ok lol i got larkoff into the gender one tho it puzzled me having a webpage one for the gender question!!!! :confused: :wink:
Reply 16
lulu_dudette
hey i did question 1 n 3 on ENB2 hope it went ok lol i got larkoff into the gender one tho it puzzled me having a webpage one for the gender question!!!! :confused: :wink:




yeah that puzzled me. i did the same questions as you though!
Reply 17
I posted something in this thread:

http://thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=393996

I'd post it again, but I'm absolutely knackered.
Reply 18
I did awful, absolutely woeful, only write barely 5 pages overall, just couldnt get ideas out onto paper, gave up in the end 30 mins early....
Reply 19
I did Occupation and Gender. I found the occupation question fine. There was enough to talk about, though I did kind of freeze when I opened the paper up. I don't know why. I think my teacher must have known something about a hospital was coming up this year....she seemed to drill loads of things about nursing into us for weeks before the exam.:smile: Having said that, I didn't really talk about the context of it being a show, but talked more about it being a realistic example of 'Face', where the surgeon and consultant may be petty and argumentative at that point in time, but for the good of the patient, whereas in a context outside of work, they may be more relaxed, and have a different face.:smile:

Gender. I only wrote 2 pages on this. There really wasn't much to write for this part of the module, and I felt myself writing literally what was written in the text.

I found ENB1 quite nice; it wasn't any harder than previous years, but I know that after ENB2 I'll not have gotten my A, but I'm sure that a B or a C should suffice:smile: There's no point in dwelling on the past, life's more about looking forward to the future:yy: **Corny I know**:P

Latest