Re: correct English usage

[Lisi <lisi.reisz@gmail.com>]

On Wednesday 04 April 2012 01:53:37 consultores wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 02:38 PM, Lisi wrote:
> > On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:04:24 consultores wrote:
> >>>> When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
> >>>> English
> >>>> exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native
> >>>> speaker,
> >>>> explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
> >>
> >> Here, i only can ask, what side of the dichotomy could be considered as
> >> an undoubted true?
> >
> > I'm sorry, I don't understand you, or I would answer.  You are indicating
> > the problem.  Words used in unusual ways are less comprehensible.  (And
> > yes, I am sure that many others will have understood you.  But sadly, I
> > have not.)
> >
> > Lisi
>
> Lisi
> i tried saying that "correct/incorrect", the dichotomy, does not have
> any meaning by itself, it needs to be appended by  "for", or who/what
> is  involve.

I was quoting exam regulations, for which I was not responsible.  You can see 
that I have put "correct" in quotation marks precisely because it needs more 
definition.  But I would imagine that they meant "correct according to the 
grammar books".  And I did say "who/what is  involve": those in Paris who 
were responsible for the exam rules for the Baccalauréat.

Lisi