Also, given the length of the journey, and no other indicators regarding how the journey took place (e.g driving, flying, by train), it�s extremely unclear where the logic�would apply most appropriately. Going from Australia or Japan to another country would require either a plane or a boat, so my first�thought would be a plane (because of where I �m from & where I live), so that is why, to me, it �s logical that the�traffic issues arise after disembarking in Spain. If it were in Australia, an 18 hour drive wouldn �t get you from the east coast to the west coast, so traffic issues would be assumed to be during the journey.

In Europe, though, I do understand that an 18 hour drive will potentially take you through many countries! Perhaps we�re both guilty of making geographic assumptions ;)�

My support is for the student simply because it is an�ambiguous gap fill exercise. Unless the students were explicitly told where past perfect and simple past tenses were to be used, the student is in the right to say�that simple past is appropriate, and should not be marked down because of that.

�

In language teaching, I often�heard it expressed that simplicity is the most sure way of clear communication. Often (according to many lecturers & teachers I have met here, let�alone direct personal experiences) language learners try to use more complex grammar than is actually required for clear communication. If teaching, exercises and tests aren �t explicit in their objectives and desired outcomes, then complexity in grammar�actually creates�difficulties in communication.

�

�Cheers,

AB�

P.S. I said nothing about �most likely�, just logical structure and how to clarify the passage.

Hi Bryce,

 

Damn, you spotted that! ;-)

Hi Tap,

 

thanks for the reply!

 

On the logic front the problem is not the �When � but the �after �, followed by the list. It can be understood to mean the sequence is listed chronologically because there is nothing explicit to determine that the events occurred during the 18 hour journey. This is why, to me, even as an exercise, the passage is not explicit enough (of itself) to be interpreted as events happening during the journey without further contextual determinants. Even the use of past perfect in (8) lends itself to and reenforces this �after � chronological structure.

 

I did ask several other teachers what they thought, and received essentially the same response about the structure and assumptions. Mind you, none of us are European, so there will undoubtedly be underlying geographic assumptions that influence our interpretations.

 

It �s not so much to do with �wrongness � of answer, but far more about how to provide clear examples in order to model effective communication to our students. Unless we �re training the politicians of the future, we really should be aiming at unambiguous communications & understanding.

 

Have a good night or day as the case may be!

AB

Still long, cold, rainy hours of daylight here before the night falls and I can get home and light the log fire!

 

Yeah, I think our difference hinges on whether the word �after � is an anaphoric or cataphoric reference.

 

Tap

 

PS FINALLY, I get to use those two words that I learned during my Applied Linguistics studies. Weird, but they never seemed easy to pop into everyday conversation before. :-))

PPS Apologies to Oto for hijacking his post! :-))