Test your Grammar here:

[the_mikey]

3/10. Some questions caused me a lot of grief, the one referring to less water was one; I don't drink coffee. Edit: I forgot to look at questions 5-10.

 

[guitarpete247]

Managed a whopping 4/10.

I was watching TV at the time, last night, when I did it. The test that is.

 

[compo]

7/10. I have never had a formal lesson about grammer in my life so I was quite pleased with that result.

 

[Nihal]

6...........didn't know what Churchill said,nor why the Queen came with King and a dress problem

 

[Yellow Fang]

Not just a cheat... A cheat and a liar!

Thank you.

 

[Shut Up Legs]

Whew! (wipes sweat from brow) - 9/10. I really had to think about a few of those.

 

[swee'pea99]

The siblings one kept me thinking for awhile. My immediate thought when I first read it was 'they've missed a comma out'. Then when I re-read it slowly and thought about it, I finally had that light-bulb moment - ah, I see what they're doing here....

 

[colly]

[QUOTE 2454189, member: 76"]You don't put full stops at the end of the sentence when in a bullet point list form. I hate it when I see other speakers at events do that, nearly as much as when they use bloody bullet points in the first place [/quote]

Really ? I knew not.

When did that little rule come in, and who decides these things ?

 

[threebikesmcginty]

[QUOTE 2454189, member: 76"]You don't put full stops at the end of the sentence when in a bullet point list form. I hate it when I see other speakers at events do that, nearly as much as when they use bloody bullet points in the first place [/quote]

So, to summarise:

• Bullet points are hateful anyway.
• But especially when people use full stops.
• The b@stards.

 

[robjh]

What a lot of drivel this so-called 'test' contained. I got 9/10 because I know what sort of things they are looking for, but to claim that many of these are 'mistakes' is just pernicious, even dangerous, nonsense, as it makes perfectly competent and fluent speakers and writers believe that they are not up to scratch in ways they cannot quite fathom.

Question 3 about the sibling Hilary is just absurd, and the answer given is clearly wrong - the commas play no part in your deciphering of the meaning. Just say it out loud - how could anyone arrive at the recommended answer?
Question 5, about usage of 'that' and 'which' in restrictive relative clauses is a largely American myth, and it is alarming to see it repeated by a reputable UK organisation. Its origin can be traced back to the early 20th century, and a competent survey of published texts shows that it is factually wrong - 'which' and 'that' are used more or less equally in restrictive clauses (the car which/that ran me over was speeding). It is true that 'that' is extremely rare in non-restrictive clauses, but that is not what is being tested here.

I could go on, but I think that gives a flavour of my view of such hokum. The 'test' is altogether a rather unpleasant little piece of pernickety one-upmanship where the author demonstrates not an understanding of real English, but his mastery of an obscure set of 'rules' that allow him to sneer at the uninitiated.

 

[rich p]

What a lot of drivel this so-called 'test' contained. I got 9/10 because I know what sort of things they are looking for, but to claim that many of these are 'mistakes' is just pernicious, even dangerous, nonsense, as it makes perfectly competent and fluent speakers and writers believe that they are not up to scratch in ways they cannot quite fathom.

Question 3 about the sibling Hilary is just absurd, and the answer given is clearly wrong - the commas play no part in your deciphering of the meaning. Just say it out loud - how could anyone arrive at the recommended answer?
Question 5, about usage of 'that' and 'which' in restrictive relative clauses is a largely American myth, and it is alarming to see it repeated by a reputable UK organisation. Its origin can be traced back to the early 20th century, and a competent survey of published texts shows that it is factually wrong - 'which' and 'that' are used more or less equally in non-restrictive clauses (the car which/that ran me over was speeding). It is true that 'that' is extremely rare in non-restrictive clauses, but that is not what is being tested here.

I could go on, but I think that gives a flavour of my view of such hokum. The 'test' is altogether a rather unpleasant little piece of pernickety one-upmanship where the author demonstrates not an understanding of real English, but his mastery of an obscure set of 'rules' that allow him to sneer at the uninitiated.

I didn't waste much time on it either Rob