Q&A - P2 English

[janet88]

lauren:

since there is no other key word to indicate the timing ie past or present, it seems both are right (the question is poorly set). if have to makg a choice, i would choose 'was' since the receiving of presents shd be a past even in order to get a sense of 'happiness' from gettg the gifts

I agree. Bcos James has already seen the presents and that is past tense, so he was happy.

[atutor2001]

chimes:

Hi, I need help on this question


James ______ happy to receive so many presents.

(1) is (2) was

I think answer is 1 because cannot use simple past tense as there is no indication that the event is already past. http://www.englisch-hilfen.de/en/grammar/simple_past_use.htm
http://www.znanje.org/knjige/english/grammar/verbs/spt.htm

[24hr-mum]

maybe post it to TAS and ask

[atutor2001]

lauren:

maybe post it to TAS and ask

No need lah. The answer is 1. For basic grammar with a single sentence structure like the question, we must have a \"past time\" then can use \"simple past tense.\"

[corneyAmber]

chimes:

Hi, I need help on this question


James ______ happy to receive so many presents.

(1) is (2) was

Honestly this is a very bad question to test because both answers are possible practically depending on context. When spoken, it would obviously have to tie back to the time and context. In fact, future tense, \"will be\" is also possible because it may be something 2 mothers are talking to each other and that boy has not seen the presents yet.

So they are testing MOE's convention of exam/test paper setting? i.e without putting any timeframe or context, there is a standard assumption?

In real life, how does this help the child to remember such an assumption set by MOE after he/she leaves school? Any purpose?? :stupid:

[janet88]

ksi:

chimes:

Hi, I need help on this question


James ______ happy to receive so many presents.

(1) is (2) was

Honestly this is a very bad question to test because both answers are possible practically depending on context. When spoken, it would obviously have to tie back to the time and context. In fact, future tense, \"will be\" is also possible because it may be something 2 mothers are talking to each other and that boy has not seen the presents yet.

So they are testing MOE's convention of exam/test paper setting? i.e without putting any timeframe or context, there is a standard assumption?

This question is badly set...esp for parents who have children in mid-upper primary. It's not clear at all.
Bottom line: James is happy to receive so many presents.

[atutor2001]

ksi:

chimes:

Hi, I need help on this question


James ______ happy to receive so many presents.

(1) is (2) was

Honestly this is a very bad question to test because both answers are possible practically depending on context. When spoken, it would obviously have to tie back to the time and context. In fact, future tense, \"will be\" is also possible because it may be something 2 mothers are talking to each other and that boy has not seen the presents yet.

So they are testing MOE's convention of exam/test paper setting? i.e without putting any timeframe or context, there is a standard assumption?

In real life, how does this help the child to remember such an assumption set by MOE after he/she leaves school? Any purpose?? :stupid:

Many misunderstood that the use of simple past tense is limited to a past action. The more subtle meaning of simple past tense is that \"what is said is no longer true.\" For example :

James is happy. ---- means James is still happy.
James was happy. ------ means at first James is happy but is no longer happy now.

So if we use :
\"James was happy to receive so many presents\"
It becomes contradictory because how can James change from being happy to unhappy so quickly when he received those presents.

Just remembered : It can be used if James is already dead

If we use :
\"James was happy to receive so many presents yesterday\"
It means at that point in time (yesterday) when James received the presents, he was happy. Whether he is happy now, we don't know. This is the normal usage of simple past tense for a past action. For such usage, the \"past time\", e.g. yesterday, just now... must be indicated.

When we use :
\"James is happy to receive so many presents\"
It means till now James is happy to receive so many presents. When he did receive those presents, we are not interested.

Hope my memory on grammar has not failed me.
:lol:

[24hr-mum]

wow, so chim.

may i ask that question came from sch papers is it? whc sch?

[I_belive]

SA2 paper from DD’s P2 English


"Willy and Hugh were goog friends. One day, Hugh came over to Willy’s house to play. Willy’s parents were out to visit a relative. They were playing hide-and-seek in the kitchen when they heard some strange noices. Both of them were frightened. They looked around. Everything in the kitchen was in order. Where did the sounds come from? They had no idea. Hugh dragged Wllly into the bedroom and hid themselves under the blanket. They listened carefuly. They could not hear the sounds any more. Willy decided to play card games with Hugh under the blanket. After an hour, they yawned and fell asleep under the blanket.
The familiar sound of jingling keys, unlocking the front door, woke Willy. He got out of the bed happiyly and went to open the door."

The last question is
"Why was Willy happy to hear the jingling sound of keys?"

[kola]

Are these grammatical correct?


“You go and have a look.”
“You go and brush your teeth.”

They sound like direct translated from CL :?
你去看一看, 你去刷牙

Is ‘go and’ necessary?
How it should be phrase?

TIA