Help needed on CELTA pre-interview tasks.

English as a Second Language English Vocabulary, Grammar and Idioms
1

Hello
Wondered if anybody could help me on these questions - I thought that this forum might be a good place to ask :slight_smile:

I have to correct each sentance, then briefly explain why the correct version is used. thats the tough part - I know the correct versions but I’m not sure why exactly :slight_smile:

here’s the incorrect sentances :

“The flat cleaned yesterday”

“When I sat down in the restaurant I realised that I’ve been there before.”

“Nobody could answer the question what was harder than usual.”

Any ideas? It also wants me to be as brief as possible :slight_smile:
Thanks in advance.

2

So please give us the correct versions and why you think they are different.

3

Ok, here are my versions, I’m not too sure if they’re correct, but I think so:

The flat “was” cleaned yesterday - The word “yesterday” indicates past tense, so the missing word is “was”

When I sat down in the restaurant I realised that “I had” been there before. - Again, the realisation was in the past tense, so “I had” is used here

Nobody could answer the question “which” was harder than usual. - I think “which” is substituted for “what” (incorrect usage), but I am not sure why.

Are these correct? But more to the point, I need to state why they are correct. All response appreciated, thanks

4

The flat “was” cleaned yesterday - The word “yesterday” indicates past tense, so the missing word is “was”-- No, the flat did no cleaning itself; someone cleaned it, so passive voice is required: was cleaned.

When I sat down in the restaurant I realised that “I had” been there before. - Again, the realisation was in the past tense, so “I had” is used here.– Yes, and the being there preceded the realization: hence, past perfect verb form.

Nobody could answer the question “which” was harder than usual. - I think “which” is substituted for “what” (incorrect usage), but I am not sure why. – The clause following ‘which’ is a non-restrictive or non-defining clause, so a comma is required before ‘which’.

5

Thank you Mister Micawber.
One of them was helpful for me too.

6

Thanks Mr. Micawber for explaining the terminology, I will use that in my answer.
There’s a part 2 also :

How would you explain to a learner of English the difference in meaning between the following pairs of sentences?

1a) He’s gone to the beach.

1b) He’s been to the beach.

Again, I know the difference and when to use each sentance, but how would you explain it? Thanks again for any input.

7

And:

2a) My brother who lives in Italy is a teacher.

2b) My brother, who lives in Italy, is a teacher.

It’s asking me to explain the difference here. I’m really lost on this last one.

8

I’d like to hear what you know about these 2 pairs of sentences first.

9

Righty Ho:

“He’s gone to the beach” - this suggests that the person is still at the beach, As in “where’s James?” “He’s gone to the beach - you’ll find him there”

“He’s been to the beach” - this would be used when a person has been to the beach and already returned.

But again, how to explain this?

Thought more about the second one:

“My brother who lives in Italy is a teacher” - This would be used if the person speaking has three brothers, for instance, who live in differant countries. The speaker wants us to know that the one in Italy is a teacher, not the others.

“My brother, who lives in Italy, is a teacher” - here the descriptions are seperated by commas, so the speaker is not specifying a certain brother - the speaker may only have one brother. Its actually irrelavant that he lives in Italy, the speaker only really wants us to know he’s a teacher. But he’s adding the Italy part because its an interesting aside.

I’m pretty sure thats along the right lines - so go on, whats the terminology used here ? Thanks a lot

10

“He’s gone to the beach” - this suggests that the person is still at the beach.
“He’s been to the beach” - this would be used when a person has been to the beach and already returned.

How to explain this?-- Your paraphrases are right, and it’s just a matter of different verbs with different meanings:
‘Go’ = to leave a place; depart: People were coming and going all the time.
‘Be’ = ( used in the perfect or past perfect tenses only ) to pay a visit; go: Have you been to Spain?

“My brother who lives in Italy is a teacher” - This would be used if the person speaking has three brothers, for instance…
“My brother, who lives in Italy, is a teacher” - here the descriptions are separated by commas, so … it’s an interesting aside.

What’s the terminology used here ?– The first clause (without the commas) is a restrictive or defining clause. It determines which of more-than-one brother is being spoken of. The second clause (with the commas) is a non-restrictive or non-defining clause. It does not define the brother because there must be only one brother (because of the commas-- rather circular reasoning, I know, but that is how we interpret the punctuation). The keyword is ‘aside’-- it is extra information. You can google both of the underlined phrases for more information.

11

Thats a great help, thank you. I Googled the terms you provided and I fully understand them.
But Christ, I thought I’d finished, clicked “next” and there’s loads more. I’ll go through them one by one:

Comment on the meaning of the underlined word in both sentences.

1a) When I was a child I would walk to school each day with my friends.

1b) Would you like a drink?

Here’s my initial answer: 1a - “Would” means “used to”. 1b - “Would” means “will you”. Not too sure about 1b though :slight_smile:

12

Here’s the next two sentences:

2a) He used to be my best friend.

2b) He used a knife to open the letter.

2a) “Used to be” means “was”. 2b) “Used” means employed, utilised.

13

1a - “Would” means “used to”.– Yes, an alternative form for ‘past habit’ ( see next)
1b - “Would” means “will you”- a more polite form. – That’s all there is to these 2 sentences, I think.

2a) “Used to be” means “was”-- ‘Past habit, past practice’
2b) “Used” means employed, utilised.-- Yes

14

So, all good? Its appreciated, thanks. lets move on . . .

Add two more similar items to each list:

  1. I’ve, won’t, he’s

  2. In, next to, near

  3. Gone, ridden, chosen

  4. Fast, hopefully, actually

tough one, this. “Similar items”? My guesses are:

  1. Isn’t, you’ve - these are abbreviations, (not to be used in academic work)

  2. Behind, above - these describe a position of something in relation to something else

  3. (I’m getting this now) broken, driven - past tense, describing things that have been acted upon or changed in some way (Thats a tough one to desribe).

  4. “Fast” and “hopefully” are manners/ways that something can be done in, so I’d throw in “nonchalantly” and “untidily” as similar words. But I’m not too sure where “actually” fits in here? Isn’t everything done in an “actual” manner?

Over to you . . . :slight_smile:

15

I think you’ve nailed 1 to 3, but is there a possibility that there’s a typo in 94) and it should really be ‘first’, not ‘fast’? That would make a lot more sense as there is then an obvious group, in the same way as the other questions have obvious groups.

16

Just double-checked, it’s defo “fast”. It’s got me, that one

17

My gut instinct is that there’s an error there, perhaps in the original.
I suspect it was originally meant to be ‘first’, ‘hopefully’ and ‘actually’… all connectives!

18

I’m just going to go with (4) as ways in which something can be done. It’s possible for something to be done - or something to happen - in an “actual” / “fast” / “hopeful” manner.

ok, Part 5:

How would you explain to a learner of English the difference in meaning between the following pairs of words?

  1. Win, beat

  2. Laugh, giggle

  3. Borrow, lend

Here’s my take on it

  1. To “win” is to be victorious in any type of competition or tournament; to “beat” is to get the better of an opponent, whilst not neccesarily “winning” the entire competition. Eg. Liverpool beat Everton to fourth place, but were a long way from winning the league.

  2. A giggle is more nervous or uncontrolled than a laugh. (But can’t laughing be uncontrolled?)

  3. To borrow is to receive something with an agreement to give it back; to lend is to give something with an agreement to get it back.

What do you think?

19

If the words were ‘actual’ and ‘hopeful’ rather than ‘actually’ and ‘hopefully’ I’d be inclined to agree with you. However, it is your choice and if you ever get feedback on the correct answer, I’d be interested in it.

I think you have explained 1 and 3 well. I agree that laughter can be just as uncontrolled as giggling so would say a giggle is lighter and quieter than a laugh and tends to be made in a nervous or silly manner. (Of course the best way to explain the difference between the two is to demonstrate, where possible!)

20

For #1, the point is that we win the game but beat the opponent; whether there is a greater tournament, etc, is irrelevant.