|
|
Post by TfS on May 30, 2008 15:15:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by goofy on May 30, 2008 15:20:06 GMT
From the Oxford Companion to the English Language:
"...it appears from the evidence that there was never a golden age in which the rules for the use of the possessive apostrophe in English were clear-cut and known, understood, and followed by most educated people."
|
|
|
|
Post by Alan Palmer on May 30, 2008 15:24:06 GMT
Well ... If it's in the Mail it must be true.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on May 30, 2008 15:28:09 GMT
Not sure the Mail would have passed. It notes "... there are already plenty of non-English speaking cabbies on the road". What's a speaking cabbie, then? And do I care if he is non-English?
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on May 30, 2008 15:30:36 GMT
Surely the test should be of spoken English and simple English comprehension? "Take me to the station" would be a good place to start. Followed by "Could you keep your right-wing views to yourself?"
(Apologies to all the liberal cabbies out there.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on May 30, 2008 15:32:16 GMT
Yes, goofy. And we often noted on the old APS that just because someone writes sausage's and mash on a pub blackboard that they can't cook a good sausage.
(Although the point was often made that people should be hired to do what they are good at -- don't ask the chef to be a signwriter, and don't let the signwriter cook the sausages.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete on May 30, 2008 16:14:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave M on May 30, 2008 16:55:54 GMT
Let us spike up our hair and put on a thick Germanic accent for a moment, here ...
We're beginning to say that the Council is being silly, the Mail having said that the driver failed because of apostrophes. Now, is that really why the driver failed? Or was it because he failed to reach a required level of English, the test for which happened to include a question about apostrophes?
If the latter, then maybe we have a sensible Council, trying to ensure that taxi drivers are able to to read the rules by which they operate and respond appropriately when asked to follow or give written instructions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr Mildr on May 30, 2008 18:39:06 GMT
Does that include me? Can I really justify correct use of an apostrophe to replace a driving test? Reminds me of when I had laser surgery on my peepers. It was so instantly successful that the surgeon announced that I would be able to drive without wearing glasses or contact lenses. Not sure that my jokey response about laser surgery replacing driving lessons and a driving test went down well. Why is it often assumed that everyone can drive? |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on May 30, 2008 18:56:05 GMT
Exactly, Dave. Never trust the papers.
Mind you, the whole trend to formalising and bureaucratising qualifications is annoying. Why would a taxi-driver need a BTEC? My wife (well, non-wife) gave up childminding when the necessary checks and assessment were transferred from the local social services team (who were sensible and informal) to Ofsted. Ofsted immediately started requiring mandatory NVQ training for childminders -- which was expensive, time-consuming, theoretical, and pointless. There are now "learning targets" for one-year-olds. Madness.
Same with school governors. They are all now required to undergo training and complete lots of forms, and to take personal financial responsibility for the school. Consequently, no-one will do it any more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on May 30, 2008 19:05:26 GMT
That's the trouble with bureaucracies. A council should make sure that taxi-drivers can drive well, know the area, and aren't known to be rapists. Other than that, every driver should be identifiable (a displayed number badge) and there should be a contact point for complaints. Then stop! This has worked well in London for years.
Sadly, bureaucracies aim for the maximum rather than the minimum, it's in their natures. Some mechanism has to be put in place to curb this tendency -- in private companies it's free market competition, but for a council (and any other monopoly) there is no such mechanism. So monopolies expand to spend however much money is poured into them at the same time as the "service" they provide declines.
So said Adam Smith, and it's hard to see he was wrong. Democracy is supposed to have that effect (bad councils get voted out) but it doesn't seem to work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tone on May 30, 2008 21:09:17 GMT
>Why is it often assumed that everyone can drive?<I think that it's more of a case that everyone who is driving is convinced that they can drive!  Tone
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete on May 30, 2008 23:04:38 GMT
Does that include me? Can I really justify correct use of an apostrophe to replace a driving test? Reminds me of when I had laser surgery on my peepers. It was so instantly successful that the surgeon announced that I would be able to drive without wearing glasses or contact lenses. Not sure that my jokey response about laser surgery replacing driving lessons and a driving test went down well. Why is it often assumed that everyone can drive? Reminds me: My father's uncle* once had a kidney operation. He asked the surgeon if he would be able to play the violin afterwards and the surgeon assured him that he would. "Great", said Uncle Alf, "as I can't now!" ;D Ah, the oldies are the best.  *For you cross-threaders out there, he is my great uncle, my father's uncle and my maternal grandmother's brother. His children are my father's first cousins and their children are my second cousins. |
|
|
|
Post by Sue M-V on May 31, 2008 11:14:34 GMT
I was interested in the nature of the English test, and although I initially thought the same as Dave M, (that other, important bits are not mentioned in the article) I also wondered why it would include such a nit-picking section as the one reproduced in the article. Surely, as we are all saying, it is communication skills that are required, rather than grammatical accuracy (for taxi drivers).
The other thing that intrigued me was the idea of having a pass mark of 70%. In Sweden the National tests in English as a second language have a pass mark of about 38%; 70% will give you a "very good" and 90% is "excellent"! I'm not saying that the actual exams are or should be in any way comparable, but the principle of passing anything should be about the same, regarding language, shouldn't it? I've always maintained that the Swedish tests are too easy to pass, but a 70% requirement for a mere pass sounds a bit excessive, even if it's a case of pass or fail only. I seem to remember that the pass mark at O Level was about 48%, wasn't it?
Sue
|
|
|
|
Post by SusanB on May 31, 2008 14:27:05 GMT
It probably depends on the marking scale. If the test for taxi drivers is a test specifically for that group, I suppose it doesn't matter what the pass mark is as long as it is marked consistently, and the pass mark is appropriate for the level required. Certainly universities in some countries have quite different marking scales from ours (in the U.K.). I haven't seen the article though, so this may be irrelevant and/or already covered.
(Recently I have seen a few instances of 'or/and'. Is this changing? Or is it coincidentally a recurring error?)
|
|
