Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by curlygiggles)
    No way! Looks like I've failed as well.
    I did Leila for CLA. I could see speech and '2 years and 5 months' through the paper, and I was jumping for joy! Until AQA decide to give us the curve ball of barely any parental interaction and she's talking like a loony to her goddamn toys!
    Everyone in my language class found speech so hard! There was hardly any CDS, I hate Jan she is a *****. And I'm sorry but all you could really talk about when all the crazy 'iggle piggle' stuff was going on was egocentric speech?!
    I found change much easier, I did the ofsted/government report and found it ok, I mainly spoke about prestige, in formalisation and technological factors (like the introduction of 'gramophones' and everyday curriculum of 'ICT').

    The only thing that gives me hope is that this exam is only 30% of the overall grade which isn't too bad. I need an A for Belfast but after this exam I will most likely get a B.

    The only thing that makes it all better though is the thought of a nice drunken summer before that fatal results day...
    Attachment 222891




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    i get the same question! It made me laugh it really did! Leila needs locking up! However it was a good mine! Every scholar I had I used, Skinner imatation, Chomsky innatnes, Wugs, Bruner, Halliday' functions and even got to reference Piaget and a bit of gender!

    hopefully that question will make up for a weaker language change question, I also did the school report! I just kept going on about formalisation. Political correctness, developments in technology and changes in society!

    i only need a C to get a B overall so I'm praying to god that I got it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Language change made me really sad though, I hate it so much, the same thing happened in January. I got a strong B in CLA, but Language Change absolutely destroyed me! I genuinely pray to God that I got a C! I need a B for uni, I wouldn't know what to do if I didn't get it.

    all the stuff I'd revised I couldn't use.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lidiya)
    Did Lizzie which is question 2 for CLA.. talked about:
    1. genre, audience, purpose, said it was in the preparation stage of Kroll, Britton's- mainly expressive style of writing revealing personal conventions and activities.
    2. grammar- we/our- inclusive pronouns therefore aware of genre. concrete nouns only- talked about Piaget here saying that she doesn't understand abstracts that is why she hasn't used them, declarative sentences, lack of subjunctive/coordinative conjunction, homophones, lack of adjectives, correc utilisation on past tense like we saw- irregular past tense verbs- Brown..
    3. Spelling- most are correctly spelt- phonologically viable, some errors like transposition, omission, insertion (because of the dialect maybe) and so on..

    Does it sound right?
    Everything sounds right, your good use of the data to back up your claims sounds viable.

    I said, in terms of Lizzie, that she was in the consolidation stage (although I don't remember explicitly if I stated that she was at the beginning, which is what I was getting at) due to her age and, grammatically, the inclusion of unfinished sentences; lexically the phonological errors show that writing still reflects spoken language.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IRP)
    How did people find question 3, the testimony from the boston massacre? Could only find a few points to talk about? Can anybody tell me what they wrote?
    I found much more to write about than the CLA part.
    I wrote about the use of the eth, the censorship of the word 'God', line justification, ligatures, capitalisation, how written mode is now resembling speaking mode (in formalisation), Latinate Lexis and how that related to higher social status groups and the ability to read as they could afford an education but now due to the education reform act everyone can afford an education, 1770 was a time when the English language was not yet fixed but standardisation was accelerating at a fast pace, prescriptivist attitudes, compound words, archaic terms and that's all I can remember.
    My friend managed to write a full 4 sides for each!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dreadpiraterach)
    Don't worry about it, it sounds to me like you've done well- you included the most interesting points where you can link it back to pragmatics and that's what tends to get the higher marks Everyone here is saying it was a hard paper, I think it was a lot more difficult than the past papers I've done. I stared at it blankly for about 5 minutes because both language change questions looked so awful Which question did you do for section A?
    Yeah, everyone in my class seemed to find the language change difficult, hopefully the boundaries will be lowered if this is the case! I did question 1, text A was a bit unusual but I managed to come up with plenty of things to talk about, probably too much actually as I kind of ran out of time. I managed to throw in quite a lot of theory but I'm not sure if I covered enough of the context. Which question did you do?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Hi there, sorry I'm a bit late to the party! I was so happy with this paper, was hoping for an 18th century text for the one text question in section B, so you can imagine my relief when I opened the paper!

    I did question 1 for section A, I think I did pretty well for AO2 because there was a lot to say in terms of theorists: The child was imitating her father's language (Skinner), the grandmother's friend was encouraging Leila's speech and recasting with intonation (Bruner and Del Hymes), Leila was correcting herself and experimenting with words (Chomsky), she was using the imaginative function (Halliday)... AO1, however, I'm not sure I will do as well. I used terms where I could but sometimes I used more contextual evidence rather than actual features of her speech, if that makes sense?

    I tend to do better in section B but I'm not so sure this time. I did question 3, and tried to link everything I spotted to the audience expectations of the time, but I think I might have been a bit thin on concepts.

    Overall I was pleased with how it went, and it's a huge relief to have it over with because I was so nervous for this exam! Will have to wait until results day now to see what it was really like!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I chose Questions 1 & 3. Personally, I didn't find either question particularly taxing because I was fortunate enough as regards Language Change to have a teacher who continually gave us old texts to write about (circa 1750).

    In addition to that, my preparation on CLA focused mainly on speech rather than reading and writing and provided that you had enough to say on relevant theorists for Q1 (e.g. Bruner = Scaffolding), Phonology (e.g. cwying to crying = liquid to glide phonemes, methods of simplification), CDS (Leila adopts CDS to address her toys), Chomsky vs. Skinner debate &c., the question was actually rather manageable.

    In my opinion, the more difficult essay to write was definitely Language Change. The two questions seemed rather constrained in what could be said and although I eventually chose to write about the 1770 text, I did consider at first the comparison between the other more modern documents. Eventually, I was drawn to the older text as one could apply multiple theories (e.g. Dr. J, Bishop Bobby Lowth's Grammar, Prescriptivism vs. Descriptivism, Secular modern society vs. Religious 1770 society + God as an expletive, Rivering and difficulty of document production in 1770 etc. ) and again the essay was fairly manageable as regards Graphology, Presentation, Orthography, Lexis and Semantic Shift, Grammar, Societal Attitudes and Technological Development leading to a good comparison between 18th Century and Modern-Day journalism.

    Given that the general consensus seems to be that this was a rather tough paper (particularly if you hadn't focused on very old texts before), I imagine that the grade boundaries will be somewhat similar to those of the January 2013 ENGB3 paper:

    87/96 = Full UMS, 77 A*, 67 A, 57 B, 47 C, 37 D, 28 E.

    Any opinions on grade boundaries? Perhaps they might be even lower but I think the paper is comparable to January '13.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No point talking about it now if its negative - whats done is done, just going to stress myself out!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    You've probably all done absolutely fine when you come out you only think of all the stuff you forgot to put in rather than all the stuff you did actually put in, I thought it was really hard for change aswell
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Given that the general consensus seems to be that this was a rather tough paper (particularly if you hadn't focused on very old texts before), I imagine that the grade boundaries will be somewhat similar to those of the January 2013 ENGB3 paper:

    87/96 = Full UMS, 77 A*, 67 A, 57 B, 47 C, 37 D, 28 E.
    That's encouraging to think the grade boundaries will be like that, thank you for posting!

    So in complete theory, if you aced one half of the exam but kinda ballsed up the other half, it's still quite possible to get an A still. I mean, I think my LA side went well (I mark myself at the end of the exam and, while obviously I'm not an examiner, I thought that side of the exam would get 40 out of 48 or so), but my LC side was dreadful (be surprised if I get more than 30 out of 48 :/). But yeah, encouraging to think that not all is lost xD
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leighash)
    Yeah, everyone in my class seemed to find the language change difficult, hopefully the boundaries will be lowered if this is the case! I did question 1, text A was a bit unusual but I managed to come up with plenty of things to talk about, probably too much actually as I kind of ran out of time. I managed to throw in quite a lot of theory but I'm not sure if I covered enough of the context. Which question did you do?
    I hope the grade boundaries are low for this paper, I need an A overall! I did question 1 too, I panicked a bit when I saw that she was making her toys talk to each other but the other text was nice, plenty of opportunities to talk about features of child directed speech. I feel like I might have done too much grammar and not enough lexis, but oh well. Don't worry too much about context, it's only worth 8 out of 48 marks and to be honest I'm not really sure what context there was to talk about other than her age and that she was in the telegraphic stage
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dreadpiraterach)
    I feel like I might have done too much grammar and not enough lexis, but oh well.
    You can never go wrong by writing about and discussing grammar, even if you do go on a bit. If you read the examiner reports for every past exam, you'll find that people tend to shy away from grammar the most. Therefore, the more you can write on it, the better!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drgcb29)
    You can never go wrong by writing about and discussing grammar, even if you do go on a bit. If you read the examiner reports for every past exam, you'll find that people tend to shy away from grammar the most. Therefore, the more you can write on it, the better!
    That's reassuring! Thank you
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey do you reckon if you've named the wrong theorist to a technique it will go against you? I think when i mentioned Jans use of recasting in CLA I may have linked it to Skinner not Bruner Other than that I think CLA went alright, there was plently of theorists like Skinner, Halliday, Baccilega and Nelson, a decent amount to write about context as well as syntax, lexis, pragmatics and grammar plus CDS.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Please please can somebody comfort me and say they spoke about the broadening of the word 'club' and pejoration of the word '****'? It felt so wrong writing about them in an exam haha! I had a lot to say for language acquisition, but I couldn't tell if the newspaper was English or American so wasn't really sure what angle to take!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mcwall1)
    Hey do you reckon if you've named the wrong theorist to a technique it will go against you? I think when i mentioned Jans use of recasting in CLA I may have linked it to Skinner not Bruner Other than that I think CLA went alright, there was plently of theorists like Skinner, Halliday, Baccilega and Nelson, a decent amount to write about context as well as syntax, lexis, pragmatics and grammar plus CDS.
    f-ck, think I did that as well.. Time to stop going to these threads
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anniele)
    Please please can somebody comfort me and say they spoke about the broadening of the word 'club' and pejoration of the word '****'? It felt so wrong writing about them in an exam haha! I had a lot to say for language acquisition, but I couldn't tell if the newspaper was English or American so wasn't really sure what angle to take!
    I mentioned club! Was going to mentiom '****' but i just couldnt bring myself to do it! Hahahaha

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mcwall1)
    Hey do you reckon if you've named the wrong theorist to a technique it will go against you? I think when i mentioned Jans use of recasting in CLA I may have linked it to Skinner not Bruner Other than that I think CLA went alright, there was plently of theorists like Skinner, Halliday, Baccilega and Nelson, a decent amount to write about context as well as syntax, lexis, pragmatics and grammar plus CDS.
    Someone in my class asked this and my teacher's response is that you should be okay in terms of AO2 if you've applied the concept correctly, but you may dip a little in AO2 and the terminology wouldn't be as accurate. Hope this helps!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    One question 1, for context, something i put was that in Text a Leila might not have shown her full linguistic competency because she was in effect 'role playing'? Didn't know whether that was totally valid?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeqegs)
    One question 1, for context, something i put was that in Text a Leila might not have shown her full linguistic competency because she was in effect 'role playing'? Didn't know whether that was totally valid?
    Yeah I briefly mentioned it in Context too, and also as she might be purposefully doing it to pee off her dad for sending her to bed
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Make your revision easier

    OMAM

    Ultimate Of Mice And Men Thread

    Plot, context, character analysis and everything in between.

    Notes

    Revision Hub

    All our revision materials in one place

    Love books

    Common grammar and vocabulary problems

    Get your questions asked and answered

    Useful literary websitesStudy help rules and posting guidelines

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.