0% found this document useful (0 votes)
329 views12 pages

Annotated - 9093 - Example - Candidate - Responses - Paper - 3 - (For - Examinations - From - 2021)

The document provides an example of a high-scoring candidate response to a paper analyzing three texts related to language change over time. It includes the response, broken into sections, and examiner comments on the strengths and areas for improvement in the candidate's answer.

Uploaded by

Pranav Karun
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
329 views12 pages

Annotated - 9093 - Example - Candidate - Responses - Paper - 3 - (For - Examinations - From - 2021)

The document provides an example of a high-scoring candidate response to a paper analyzing three texts related to language change over time. It includes the response, broken into sections, and examiner comments on the strengths and areas for improvement in the candidate's answer.

Uploaded by

Pranav Karun
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Question 1

Example Candidate Response – high Examiner comments

1 1 The candidate begins


their response with a succinct
introduction which identifies the
context of Text A.
2
2 The candidate gives an
immediate reference to a relevant,
if rather well-known, linguistic
approach.

3 3 The candidate provides a


developed commentary on how
Text A demonstrates language
change over time, given its blog
form and its place in 21st century
written language.
4
4 The candidate uses accurate
linguistic terminology to analyse and
demonstrate semantic change over
time.
5
5 The candidate shows their
conceptual understanding with their
detailed discussion of de Saussure’s
semiotic system. This developed
paragraph contains insightful ideas
which are described using an
effective level of expression.

6
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – high (continued) Examiner comments

6 The candidate uses incorrect


6 conceptual labelling.

7 7 The candidate is careful to


provide the full names of the author
and the theory when they reference
linguistic approaches.

8 8 Although the candidate’s


analysis remains within the linguistic
framework of semantics, they show
cohesion between Texts A and B.
9 9 The candidate accurately
identifies the periods from which
Text B draws its data.

10 10 The candidate fully discusses


linguistic concepts including
connotation, affixation and
amelioration in their analysis of
‘awe’ and ‘awesome’. They include
details from Text A to develop the
paragraph and provide a cohesive
analysis of data sets.

7
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – high (continued) Examiner comments

11 11 The candidate gives a clear


interpretation of the graphic
representation of linguistic data,
although this could be more
succinct. They do not offer any
reasons for the increased use of
acronym, however.
12
12 The candidate’s reference to
Halliday is relevant and they make
an appropriate development of the
consideration of the data contained
in the n-gram. However, their
register and control of expression
relaxes at this point and becomes
less sophisticated.

8
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – high (continued) Examiner comments

13 The candidate now turns to


13 grammar and syntax to analyse
Text A further, selecting contraction
to discuss comparative levels of
formality.

14 14 The candidate refers to Halliday


and Crystal in this paragraph. Both
of these approaches are relevant to
the analysis although there may be
others equally, if not more, relevant
to the topic of levels of formality.

15 15 Overall, the candidate presents


a sustained and detailed response
with an effective level of expression.
The candidate logically sequences
their ideas and develops them
with reference to relevant linguistic
concepts, methods and approaches.
At times the candidate applies a
sophisticated level of technical
terminology to the data selected for
analysis.

Total mark awarded =


24 out of 25

9
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

How the candidate could have improved their answer


• For most of the response, the candidate effectively maintained their register and level of expression, and at times
they showed sophistication in their answer. To improve their answer, the candidate needed to maintain their
register and level of expression throughout the response.
• Most of the answer focused on the linguistic framework of semantics, while grammar and syntax only featured
towards the final section of the answer. To improve their answer, the candidate needed to give a more detailed yet
succinct analysis of semantics, balanced with at least one other linguistic framework.
• The candidate selected sufficient data from the texts to achieve a thorough analysis. However, to improve their
answer, the candidate could have used a more varied selection, which corresponded to a wider choice of linguistic
frameworks.
• The candidate’s reference to linguistic concepts, methods and approaches was thorough, especially in the
discussion of de Saussure. However, they referred to Crystal and Halliday twice. To improve their answer, the
candidate needed only to refer to these theorists once and then explore the work of other more relevant theorists.
This would have been particularly useful in the later analysis of grammar and syntax, which was shorter than the
analysis of semantics.
• The candidate analysed all three texts in relation to one another. Although they interpreted Text C well, to improve
their answer the candidate needed to offer some ideas about how and why it evidenced the acronym reaching its
height in the 1980s, or suggested how the acronym may fall out of favour in the future.

10
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – middle Examiner comments

1 1 Instead of providing a general


introduction, the candidate begins
an immediate lexical analysis. They
develop the analytical comments
with a discussion on how use of the
adjective ‘sharp’ may have changed
over time.

2 2 The linguistic concept of


broadening is applied to a clear
analysis.

3 3 The candidate begins to select


data from Text A. Their expression
is clear although they do not
accurately punctuate their quotes
from the text.

4 4 Further data is selected from


Text A with a discussion relating
to how technological change may
have affected language used in the
electronic mode.

5 5 The lexical analysis is clear but


the candidate does not use linguistic
terminology to describe the data,
which lowers the register of their
response.

11
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – middle (continued) Examiner comments

6 The candidate recognises the


form of Text A but does not discuss
how the blog form represents
6 change and development in
language.
7 Although the candidate attempts
to describe change over time
of ‘dress better’, the comments
7 are assertive with no supporting
reference.
8 The candidate loses linguistic
focus here, as the discussion
has turned to fashion rather than
8
language.
9 The candidate’s description
here is clear and their data selection
is relevant. A deeper analysis of
‘rock’ in terms of its use as a verb
would be useful.

12
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – middle (continued) Examiner comments

10 The candidate returns to the


10 concept of broadening. Although the
data considered under broadening
is different at this point in the
response, it could have been better
used to deepen the original analysis
of the concept.
11 11 The candidate’s analysis
introduces Text C to demonstrate
growth in the use of the acronym
seen in Text A, which provides some
cohesion.
12 At the conclusion of this
paragraph, the candidate gives
12 an interpretation of the graphic
representation of the data. However,
13 they do not offer a comment on why
the increase of the use of acronyms
may have come about.
13 The candidate returns to the
idea of broadening. Their analysis
is clear but would have been better
14 placed to deepen the analysis on
broadening seen earlier.
14 Text B is now introduced as
the candidate begins an analysis of
‘awesome’ and the lemma ‘awe’, so
all three texts are explored.
15 The candidate’s interpretation
of Text B is clear; they show a clear
15 understanding of the concepts of
positive and negative connotation,
and narrowing.

16 16 Overall, the candidate’s


expression is clear, with clear
sequencing of ideas. However,
the candidate could have linked
the analysis together under the
concept of broadening to provide
a more logical response. They
choose a clear selection of data for
analysis, comprising items from all
three texts. However, they make a
limited conceptual reference with no
mention of theoretical approaches.
Total mark awarded =
14 out of 25

13
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

How the candidate could have improved their answer


• The candidate’s expression was clear and organised into a fluent sequence of ideas. To improve their answer and
their depth of analysis on the linguistic concept of broadening, the candidate needed to link the three separate
discussions together.
• The candidate used all three texts, but their analysis of Texts B and C was weaker with some generalised
comments or assertion. They used Text B briefly and only at the end of the response. To improve their answer, the
candidate needed to select more data from Text B and analyse how, over time, semantic and pragmatic changes
had developed.
• The candidate discussed the linguistic concepts of broadening and narrowing. To improve their answer and their
analysis of Text C, the candidate needed to include the concept of amelioration to develop their ideas and to
demonstrate an increased use of technical terminology.
• To improve their answer, the candidate needed to refer to theoretical methods or approaches. Crystal or
McCulloch, for example, both offered ideas on the ways in which technological developments have led to the
changing use of English. The candidate could have used Text A, in its blog form, to provide a springboard for this
analysis.

14
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – low Examiner comments

1 1 The candidate begins with a


succinct introduction which gives
a brief overview of the influence
of technological changes on the
development of language.
2 The description of the
conversational style of the text is
plausible. However, the candidate
2 refers to ‘they’ instead of ‘the
writer’ or his name which lowers
the register of the response and
detracts from their control of
expression.
3 3 The candidate incorrectly
applies the term ‘jargon’ to the data
selected.
4
4 The candidate begins a
discussion on ‘FYI’ as seen in Texts
A and C. They use a generalised
rather than a specific audience
identification as a springboard for
this. They develop their comments
5 in part with reference to character
limitation in the electronic mode
but they need to add depth to their
analysis.
5 The candidate does not include
a paragraph break to separate their
ideas and the response now begins
6 to discuss Text B. Although this
means that the candidate attempts
to analyse all three texts, their ideas
are presented in one long paragraph
rather than a logically organised
sequence.
6 The candidate offers an
interpretation of the change over
time of the noun ‘awe’, using
Text B. The discussion is
generalised and would benefit from
a reference to amelioration. Not all
of the candidate’s interpretation of
the semantic meaning of ‘awe’ is
accurate.

15
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Example Candidate Response – low (continued) Examiner comments


7 7 Although this list is taken from
Text A, the comments are not fully
relevant to the question.
8 Some graphological features
of Text A are discussed in general
8 terms but the candidate does not
select any evidence from the text to
support their claims.
9 The candidate discusses
9 jargon but does not include an
example so their discussion is weak.
They briefly describe the PIDC
model (Potential-Implementation-
Diffusion-Codification) but they
do not mention Aitchison, nor why
this model is relevant to the data
presented.
10 The candidate’s conclusion
10 contains relevant comments but
would beneft from some examples
11
of data to support them.
11 Overall, the response is
brief, which indicates a lack of
development. The candidate’s
expression is generally clear,
although some ideas are not
presented in logically sequenced
paragraphs. They provide some
generalised discussion on the ways
in which technological developments
have influenced language change
and a very brief reference to one
linguistic approach. The candidate’s
selection of data for analysis is
limited which in turn has limited the
analytical depth of the response.
Total mark awarded =
11 out of 25

How the candidate could have improved their answer


• Although the candidate’s expression was generally clear, to improve their answer, they needed to separate their
analysis into logically sequenced paragraphs and use a series of linguistic frameworks to organise the work.
• The candidate’s answer was quite short, which indicated a lack of development of their ideas. To improve their
answer, the candidate needed to use a greater selection of data from each of the three texts. This would have
extended the discussion and provided a more linguistic, rather than generalised, viewpoint. In particular, they used
a limited selection of data from Text A, which would have provided a good opportunity for the candidate to analyse
graphology, lexis, grammar, syntax, pragmatics and semantics.
• The candidate made some general references to the influence of technological development on language change,
but their discussion on linguistic concepts, methods or approaches was limited. The candidate briefly mentioned
the PIDC model but did not assign it to an author and did not describe its relevance to the data so marks could not
be awarded for AO4. To improve their answer, the candidate needed to give a fuller conceptual discussion which
could have included Chen’s S-Curve in relation to Text B and amelioration in relation to Text C.
16
Example Candidate Responses – Paper 3

Common mistakes candidates made in this question


• Many candidates began the analysis with a long discussion presented as a timeline of change in the English
language, which started in the sixteenth century and ended at the present day. Long introductions were
unnecessary in an analytical response and detracted from time candidate’s could have spent answering the
question. Some candidates’ conclusions only repeated what had been said previously and offered a discursive,
sociological – rather than analytical, linguistic – standpoint.
• AO2 marks were awarded both for control of expression and development of ideas. Many candidates spotted
features, particularly in Text A, but then did not follow this up with a deeper analysis of how and why such features
might have represented language change. This was seen in shorter answers, or those which analysed only one or
two (instead of all three) texts.
• Many candidates worked through the three texts one by one, but they needed to select ideas from Text A which
could be considered alongside at least one of the remaining Texts B and C. This resulted in a lack of cohesion; the
texts were presented as standalone items but should have been analysed in relation to one another.
• Many candidates’ interpretations of Text C were generally sound, although some just described the data when
they should have presented the analytical findings. This gave the effect of paraphrasing, which limited the depth of
analysis.

17

You might also like