Warm-Up 4 and the end of the course

Warm-Up 4 doesn't give you any marks (!), but it is, perhaps, a way for you to see the collective wisdom of the group about two key areas in the In-Tray exam: complaining and apologising. Since you don't get any marks for it, you don't have to do it either - but I'm sure that your contributions will be gratefully received by everyone else, if you do!

You publish your Warm-Up 4s as comments to this blog post.

The In-Tray Exam is based on the idea that you work for a temporary agency (like Manpower) and have been sent in to cover the work of one of the people employed by one of the companies on this course. An in-tray is the plastic or metal tray on your desk into which all the paperwork you have to deal with is placed. When you've dealt with it, it's transferred to your 'out-tray' to be sent off or filed.

The exam itself will be posted on the course web site on Friday, 27th April (via the Module 4 section of the site). It's a .pdf document which you can either download or read directly from the screen. When you read it, you'll notice that there are four writing tasks to complete, but you're given three complete sets of tasks to choose between, one for each of the companies in the course materials.

You don't have to stick to the same company for all four tasks - you can switch from one company to another, or you can stay with the same company all the way through.

You submit your In-Tray Exam to David Richardson as a Word document by e-mail. (If you're using Microsoft Works, rather than Word or an equivalent, remember to save the document as an .rtf - Rich Text Format - document, or David won't be able to open it).

When the exam's been received, David will print it on paper, mark it manually, write a mark and commentary for each task, and, finally, add your In-Tray Exam marks to the marks you've received for your Warm-Ups and Send-Ins. When the total exceeds 60 marks, you've passed, and when the total exceeds 80 marks, you've got a 'VG'. Your marks are reported on LADOK, the Swedish national university computer, more or less the same day the exam's marked.

When everything's finished, David puts your exam, the commentary and a statement of your total marks into an envelope and posts it to whatever address we have for you (if you've recently moved, or haven't given us your address, please let us know your current address as soon as possible). He'll also send you a mail straightaway with your final result.

At the end of the final mail is a link to the on-line course evaluation. This is totally anonymous - and, besides, you've already got your mark, so you can say what you like! Feedback from you is very valuable to us (even if you don't get any direct benefit from it!) and all of us on the course team greatly appreciate hearing what you've thought of the course.

Good luck with the exam! The due date is 3rd June … but, as usual, we'll be understanding if you're a little late.

General Comment on Warm-Up 3

Once again, you've done a good job on this task. Formal English can seem a bit pedantic, but the reason it's like that is that when you write reports like this, you have to express yourself in precise and unambiguous terms … which is the exact difference between good formal English and good informal English!

In other words, when you speak or write informally, you don't want to strip away the nuances so that what you say can only be interpreted one way … and when you express yourself formally, the opposite occurs. Compare, for example, what a proposal of marriage might sound like with the form of words which is used in the marriage ceremony!

This particular task had a number of hidden 'traps' in it, so here are some tips about how you can avoid them:

1. Colloquial Language

This is a very difficult area, because it's hard to see from the word itself whether or not it's colloquial. 'Diggers', for example, as some of you discovered, is colloquial: they're called 'excavators', or sometimes 'front-loaders', if they're the kind which, say, pick up large amounts of sand at a time. A front-loader will often have a 'back-hoe' attachment which allows it also to excavate … just to make things difficult. 'Dumper trucks', on the other hand, isn't colloquial - that's what they're called (they're small vehicles, like a huge wheelbarrow with an engine!).

2. Rules and Regulations

There's a subtle difference between these two. 'Rules' are for situations you've entered into on a voluntary basis; 'regulations' are part of the law. Thus a private club can have rules - if you break them, you might be thrown out of the club, but you won't be arrested. Regulations, on the other hand, are written into the law (or the basis on which they're written is written into the law). If you break them, there can be legal consequences.

3. The Language of Obligation

This is a particularly difficult area for Swedes, since the word 'obligatorisk' looks so much like 'obligatory' … but there are all sorts of differences.

Let's get 'obligatory' out of the way first. Mostly, this word is used in similar situations to the ones where 'rules' are used: for situations you've entered into voluntarily. A doctor, lawyer or priest (or even a teacher!) has certain obligations which are part of their profession. A doctor, for example, has an obligation to suggest the best course of treatment for you, not because she could be arrested if she doesn't, but because she swore an oath when she became a doctor to behave this way, which was an obligation taken on freely. Another way to look at it is that an obligation (which is 'obligatory') comes from within the individual.

If you don't have a choice about something at all (either because of regulations, or because of common sense, such as testing your parachute before you go up in the air), then it's compulsory.

You might be 'recommended' to do something (like wear warm clothing before you jump off a mountain in a paraglider!), but if you're 'advised' to do something, that's a great deal stronger. I might be advised to check the wind speed too before I jump off that mountain. They can't actually stop me, though, if I choose to ignore either a piece of advice or a recommendation.

And if I'm following the regulations in the law, I'll be 'required' to do something (like having my driving licence with me if I drive a car in Sweden - in the UK you used only to be required to produce it at a police station within three days!). Having your licence on you when you drive in Sweden is therefore a 'requirement' and you can be prosecuted or fined solely on the basis that you left it at home before you sat in the car and drove off.

In this exercise, then, the Chinese were required to follow the regulations because that's compulsory in Sweden!