從不同渠道，斷斷續續聽到關於今屆會考/高考的消息，先是英文科聆聽卷「粗口滿天飛」(同事說是出了 sh*t 一字
緊貼潮流本來值得表揚 (難道還跟現在的中學生談《史記》？)，但有關當局今次卻做得過火了。相信大部分中文老師，在教學生寫作時，都不會讓他們以「潮」語入文；現在考評局出了一份這樣的試卷，根本是為學生的「胡作非文」開了先例，叫老師以後如何教人？
這份「潮」卷除了為老師添麻煩，也讓栗摸不著頭腦。很多潮語根本就沒有劃一的定義可言，即使是同一句，不同人也會有不同的解釋。把這種變數加入考卷中，不是自找麻煩嗎？官員的傳統智慧都跑到哪裡去了？
[請看圖門縣候補知縣的補充]
這是天大誤會。
回覆刪除其實網上早已有人澄清，那段錯解的「潮文」只是引子，試卷是要學生討論運用「潮語」對日常生活和溝通的影響。其實就算那段潮文錯晒都冇關係，學生就自己睇法寫討論就得。
根本沒有人要考學生懂不懂「潮語」。只是有人「賴地硬」而已。
當然，也不是說考評局沒問題，一係唔出，要出就唔該內容準確一些。考生見到試卷講既同自己知既有出入，一定會O嘴。
[版主回覆05/04/2008 17:17:00]謝謝！
我看了大人那篇密碼，搞到一頭霧水，於是就自己寫一篇，引大人過來給我說個清楚
說給老師添麻煩，確有可能，因為我跟中三的學生說完，他第一句就問我，以後是否可以「潮」語入文
(Empty)
回覆刪除[版主回覆05/05/2008 07:45:00](Empty)
屈機根不是這樣解釋！現在的老師素質嚇死人。
回覆刪除[版主回覆05/05/2008 07:48:00]施裴：據考卷的解釋，屈機是指玩遊戲者因無力取勝而屈服，這個解釋還算通 ，但放在「潛水怕屈機」中，就真是不知所謂了。
幸好得樓下那位博客澄清，我起初真以為考評局在考學生「潮」語呢！ 如果是借錯句來作討論，還能接受。
Some guy from the exam authority wrote in the SCMP Saturday denying the word "shit" being in the exam, only "damn" and "hell".
回覆刪除[版主回覆05/05/2008 07:57:00]'Damn'?! Maybe they'll use 'f**k' and 'suck' next time.
Teach, thanks for the info!
I am sure they've used the word suck, which, of course, is not considered vulgar, unless within certain context. I remember back in the 60s, gee, 40 years ago now, in my high school PE class, the teacher announced one day, in a noticeably uncomfortable way, that the school had decided that we could use the words damn and hell during athelitic activities, but nothing more.
回覆刪除[版主回覆05/05/2008 08:45:00]Interesting, Teach. Why did your school announce such a 'rule'? I don't think it is appropriate for a school to give permission to the use of these words in a particular context.
Personally, I don't object to using 'damn' and 'hell' (no matter you prohibit these words or not, students will use them anyway), but I don't think they should appear in an exam paper. My concern is that some 'naughty' students might cite the exam paper as an example and use coarse languages in class or in their writing. That will bring a lot of problems to the teachers.
Thanks for pointing my bias out. I forgot this word 'suck' has other meanings.
Time to work
That was 40 years ago in the US. Apparently, the school decided at that time to have such a rule to control the kids' language on the playground. They allowed those two words so the kids had some words to use during the heat of a game, but they didn't want them to go further than that. Sure, some kids would always go further, but hopefully, not within earshot of the teacher. We were much better behaved kids 40 years ago, even if you compared higly individualized American kids at the time to HK kids today.
回覆刪除香港很多官員都沒智慧架啦!
回覆刪除[版主回覆05/07/2008 08:14:00]但他們不是很會因循的嗎？一創新便出亂子......