파수꾼|2010

십대이야기라서인지 호밀밭의 파수꾼이 생각나는 제목...

소년들이 실핏줄피부를 가졌을 거라는 건 생각해 본 적 없었다.

그런데.

이 소년들은 말하지 않았을 뿐, 그 아픈 시기를 거칠게 나며 더 깊은 상처를 받았다.

이렇게 모진 인생의 망치를 그렇게 여린 순간에 맞는다는 것은 

지켜보는 것만도 정말 아픈 일이다. 

어쩌면 주먹질이 차라리 나았던 거니. 

(그래서 니들은 주먹을 쓰고야 마는 거니--;;)

슬펐다.

시간이 흐를수록

셋을 더 듣고 더 보고 알아갈수록.

이제, 

이 영화를 만든 사람이 원했을 것 처럼,

길을 지나는, 'ㅆ'없이는 단 한문장도 말하지 않는 너희가 

예전과 달라보일 것 같아.

  

슬퍼지는 사이 류승범의 삼색비늘을 하나씩 나눠가진 것 같은 세 청년배우들과

처음이 분명 아닌데 이 영화를 첫인상으로 기억하게 될 조성하를 발견하다.

동윤이 몫의 슬픔은 

기태를 두려워하지 앟는 눈빛에서 미루어 짐작했었다.

원래 좋아하면 무서워하지 않잖아.

들고찍기로 좀 어지럽긴 했지만

오전에 봤던 영화제 싹쓸이 수상작을 압도하는 기억에 남을 한 편.

근데, 요즘도 말뚝박기 하고 논단 말이니...

기태-이제훈, 동윤-서준영, 백희 겸 희준-박정민

킹스스피치|The King's Speech|2010

포스터가 썩 맘에 들지는 않지만 여왕이 있어야 하니깐.

몰락해가는 제국에서 예상치 않게 왕위에 오르는 컴플렉스를 가진 왕자.

흥미가 가는 소재이긴 하지만, 이렇게 재미있는 드라마가 되기까지의 과정이 더 궁금해진다.

권위보다는 인간적인 관계와 모습에,

전쟁과 제국말기라는 거대한 상황속에서 오히려 개인의 도전을 바라보게 만든 발상의 전환으로

드라마에 집중시킨다.

제목인 '킹스스피치'로 달려가는 결말도 흥미진진.

내가 생각하는 좋은 배우는 클로즈업을 잘 감당하는 배우여야 한다.

배우라는 직업이 어차피 카메라 앞에 고정된 것이니

가장 적극적으로 일해야 하는 순간이

바로 클로즈업이기 때문이다.

어떤 영화에서든 배우의 클로즈업이 이렇게나 많이 등장한 적이 있던가?

두려움과 긴장, 순간적인 분노, 자부심과 안도에 이르기까지

콜린 퍼스 앨범이라 부를만하다.

말더듬이라는 부자연스러움을 자연스럽게 연기하는 그를 보는 것이

하나도 어색하지 않았다.

오히려 일상복귀가 걱정될 정도.

분장없이 캐러비안의 해적에 나왔어도 그 느낌 그대로였을 것 같은

제프리 러쉬의 독특한 얼굴도 방가~

하지만 가장 새로운 모습은 헬레나 본햄 카터였다.

이 독특한 외모와 분위기를 가지고도 여왕에서 밑바닥 처자까지

안되는 게 없는 놀라운 배우.

이렇게나 풍부한 표정을 하필 표정없이 살것 같은 여왕의 역할로 보여준 것도 멋지다.

함께 있으면 든든해질 수 밖에 없을 반모반처의 '로얄마누라'^^

영화, 배우 불만 없음.

하지만 각종 영화제의 싹쓸이라니

미국의 영국영화 컴플렉스야 말로 불치병임을 보여주는 듯.

슬픔이여 안녕|프랑소와즈 사강

언제부턴인가 나는 울적하면서도 한편으로는 노곤하고 달콤한 상태가 뒤섞인 묘한 감정 상태를 경험하기 시작했다.

사람들은 이런 감정을 어떻게 정의하는지 몰라도 나는 이 어설픈 감정을 '슬픔'이라는 거창하고 아름다운 이름으로 불러야 할 것인지를 놓고 주저하고 있다.

왜냐하면 이것은 너무나도 완전하고 이기적인 감성이어서, 한편으로는 부끄러운 생각마저 들기 때문이다.

그럼에도 불구하고 이 슬픔처럼 느껴지는 감정은 언제나 고상하게 느껴지곤 한다.

나는 지금까지 나른함이나 뉘우침, 그리고 아주 가끔은 양심의 가책 같은 것은 느껴보았지만, 슬픔이라는 것은 알지 못했었다. 그런데 요즘에는 무엇인가 부드러운 기운이 나를 덮어씌워 다른 사람들로부터 거리감을 느끼게 하고 있다.

원제가 궁금해서 찾아봤더니

Hello Sadness(Bonjour tristesse )란다.

1954년의 소설이라는 것도 놀랍다.

열아홉에 쓴 첫 소설이라는 이 책은

스스로 성숙하다고 믿으며 이지적으로 보이고 싶어도 하는 소녀가 겪은

잔인한 동심의 유년을 적은 기록이다.

굳이 작가 약력을 보지 않더라도

충분히 자전적인 소설의 느낌은 든다.

그녀의 소설은 슬픔과의 만남으로 끝이 났지만

이제 만난 슬픔과 좀 더 친하고 나면

그녀가 받은 그 첫인상의 고상함과 달콤함, 아름다움이

묵직한 아픔에 압도당하게 될 것도 같은 생각이 들었다.

가책과 슬픔을 구분하는 이 예민함과

감상을 즐기는 이 정서야말로

소녀만이 가질 수 있는 사치가 아닐까.

옛날에 한번 읽었던 것 같은데 하나도 기억나지 않았던 소설.

조제, 호랑이 그리고 물고기들에 등장한 후로 한번은 읽고 싶었다.

그 후로도 이 작가는 뽑아내기에 멋진 말들을 많이 남긴 것 같긴 했는데......

iPhone 3일 천하

3일간 갖고 놀던 아이폰4를 4일째 되던 날 취소했다.

직접적이고 결정적인 원인은 고장.

탈옥같은 건 꿈도 꾸지 않았고 느닷없는 사고 같은 것도 없었는데

침대위에서 얌전히 알람벨소리를 내다가 정지를 틱하는 순간

갑자기 쪼개진 사과와 비밀번호화면이 1초간격으로 오락가락하기 시작했다.

그 전날 아이북어플도 약간 말썽이 있었던 지라 껐다가 켜면 될 줄 알고

버튼을 눌렀는데 꺼지지도 않았다.

충분히 긴 설명을 들기는 했지만 결정적인 건 편안대로 기억하고 있던 차라

대리점에 가지고 갔더니

AS센터에 가서 진단서를 끊어오란다.

다행이 걸어서 10분 거리에 있는 센터로 갔는데

사람은 별로 없지만 한 사람 당 시간이 꽤 걸려 한 20분 기다렸다.

기다리는 동안 29만원짜리 수리를 하는 사람을 세명이나 봤다.

그 중 둘은 리퍼폰을 받아갔고.

그걸 보고 앉아 있자니 갑자기 쌓였던 불만이 올라왔다.

미리 공지를 받았다고는 하지만

산 지 3일 밖에 안되는 100만원에 육박하는 물건을 들고

이리저리 왔다갔다하게 된 것도 맘에 안들었고,

이게 과연 내가 그렇게나 갖고 싶어할만한 물건인가 싶은 생각도 들었다.

게다가 별도의 공지가 필요할 만큼 까다롭게 팔아먹고 있는 장단에

내가 왜 그렇게 쉽게 맞춰줬을까 싶기도 하고.

30만원 주고 산 나의 중소기업로봇청소기는

2년이 지나도 택배로 보내면 종합검진까지 해서 보내주던데

대체 아이폰은 왜 이 정도 밖에 안되는데 유혹적일까.

그래, 이쁜 건 사실이다.

스마트폰 보다는 아이폰이 갖고 싶었으니까.

하지만 어째 3일만의 싸인은

앞으로도 이런 번거로운 일이 엄청나게 많을 거라는 불길함을 느끼기에 충분.

그래서 갈등 끝에 진단서를 받아다가

그냥 취소를 해버렸다.

취소는 간단했다.

옛 전화기로 모든 것이 돌아왔고

요금제도 USIM도 같이 취소됐다.

아이폰으로 북마크를 해두었던 것이 메일로 들어와 있어 좀 놀랐다.

요건 똑똑했네...

아이폰으로 장난삼아 찍은 동영상이 있었는데

그건 다 지워졌겠지.

이 불만도 아이폰5와 함께 다시 사라져

또 스마트폰에 껄떡댈진 모르겠지만

일단 안맞는 인연은 이걸로 안녕.

그런데 그 전화기의 가격은 과연 적당한 게 맞는 걸까.

싸인:과연 불편한 '진실'이었을까

나는 음모론이 정말 싫다.

내가 모르는 거대한 천정위에서 나는 느끼지도 못하는 거대한 힘이 세상을 움직이고 있으며

내가 느끼는 작은 감동이나 작은 반가움, 분노라는 건 사실 아무 힘도 없고

나는 깨닫지 못하는 군중의 하나 혹은 무기력한 대기 희생자 중 하나라는 사실을

속편하게 받아들일 수가 없기 때문이다.

그래서 싸인의 마지막이 순교자연하는 윤지훈의 선택으로 끝난 것은

씁쓸하더라도 그렇게까지 하지 않으면 아무것도 얻을 수 없다는 현실의 반영이라고

이해할 수는 있었다.

하지만 그렇게 현실적이려 노력하는 듯 달려간 결말에 비해 조립된 살인마는 옥의 티다.

고작 그 정도의 권력만으로 그렇게 허술하게 연쇄살인을 저지르고 다닌다?

갈등의 맥이 빠지는 건 악당이 멍청해서다.

모른다로 일관하던-사실은 정말 몰랐을 것도 같은 김영삼의 청문회를 보는 느낌이랄까.

목숨을 걸고 항변을 해도 무기력하게 묻혀버리는 힘 빠지는 현실을 사는 것도

충분히 신나지 않는 일인데,

세상에 대한 사람들의 불신과 비호감에 전적으로 기대어 만든

이런 불성실한 음모론도 맘에 들지는 않는다.

내가 감동할 수 없었던 이유.

사사건건|2009

메인포스터-다음에서 다운받을 수 있음

산책가(김영근, 김예영 감독)

앞을 못보는 동생이 만든 입체 산책길을 따라가는 애니메이션.

안보이는 세상의 다양한 색들이 신체적인 한계와 상상력의 무관함을 강력히 주장한다.

때로는 보는 것보다 만든 사람의 의도가 더 정확하다는 걸 보여주려는 야심찬 시도.

보지도 않고 느끼는 세상에 대한 성실한 상상.

이쁜 애니메이션이었지만 재료들의 질감에 좀 더 이야기가 들어있었더라면 하는

아쉬움이 남았다.

그랬더라면 짧은 상영시간이 전혀 지루하지 않았을 텐데.

아들의 여자(홍성훈 감독)

느닷없을 것 같은 아들의 여자의 등장에

익숙하게 대처하는 아버지.

거침없는 감정의 주고받음이 인상 깊었지만

대책없이 찰나에 끝나는 선택이

좀 무책임하게 느껴졌다.

모든 중요한 일들의 결정적인 선택이 실은 감정적이라는 것은 이해하지만

짧은 시간에 몰입하는 감정으로 풀어내기엔

좀 느긋해 보이는 결말.

남매의 집(조성희 감독)

왜 독특한 상상력은 폭력적이고 공포스러운 상황에서 꽃이 피는 걸까.

두 칸짜리 반지하에서 벌어지는 짧은 순간의 공포.

정말 무섭다.

노골적인 폭력장면은 등장하지 않는데도 그렇다.

단지 너무나도 연약한 두 아이들이 주인공이기 때문이라고 하기엔

공들여 짜여진듯한 그 공포의 스케쥴이 대단하다.

역시 공포란 예상을 어긋날 때 온다.

문틈으로 가짜 손을 내밀어 남매를 잡아먹으러 온 호랑이 처럼 등장하는 이방인.

이들은 미안하다고도 하고 어린 아이들에게 존댓말을 쓰기도 하고 서로를 비난하기도 하면서

각자의 공포를 발산한다.

그들은 들어올 때도 그랬다.

화면은 그저 철문에 이무렇지도 않게 붙은 조그만 고양이 스티커로 집중되어 있고

아이들은 나란히 서 있었을 뿐.

그런 풍경이 이렇게 무서운 느낌을 줄 거라고 상상해 본 적도 없는데.

이미 29일 전에 분리되었다는 아버지,

신고전화를 받는 부랑자들의 빅 브라더,

그 공포를 관통하며 사라졌던 여동생의 재등장,

그 사이 공포속에 자란 아이의 폭력성.

다시는 절대 보고 싶지 않지만

이 감독의 신작은 보고 싶어지는 묘한 자극.

이런 독특함을 슬프지 않게, 무섭지 않게 해줄 수 있는 사람은 정말 없는 걸까.

잠복근무(이정욱 감독)

너무 좋은 아이디어였다-추운날 번데기장사 위장 잠복근무라는 건.

가장 익숙하게 볼만한 단편이었지만

그래서 장편영화의 미니어쳐 같기도 했던.

중요한 추격씬의 널럴함이 좀 아쉽기도 했던.

블로거 크롬 오류

오늘 갑자기 크롬에서 새글쓰기가 안된다.

글쓰기 화면에서 제목은 쓸 수 있는데

본문칸에 동글뱅이가 계속 돌아가면서

글쓰기가 불가능한 상태.

인터넷익스플로러에서는 쓸 수가 있었다.

블로거 '자주발생하는문제'에 나와있긴 한데

아직 완전히 해결은 안됐다.

일단은 설정으로 들어가서 편집기를 최신이 아니라 기존으로 바꾸면

옛날 스타일로 쓰기가능.

멀쩡하다 문제가 생기는 건 왜일까....

SK아이폰4 까보기

기다리고 기다리던 SK의 아이폰4.
모두가 KT로 갈아탈 때도
난 언젠가 SK에서도 가능할 거라고 믿으며
가족할인을 포기하지 않고 기다렸다.

그래서 지난 주 예약가입 첫날 인터넷예약을 시작했는데
고객정보를 제휴사에 넘기는 것에 강제 동의항목 등장
-이 양아치 짓거리는 언제까지 계속들 할 건지....참 기분상하는 대목이다.
암튼 그래서 대리점으로 갔다.
생각보다 오래 걸린 상담.
궁금한 게 많았지만 그분도 그다지 잘 아는 것 같지는 않았기에
대충하다 말았지만...

약정상품을 고를때 얼마나 데이터를 쓰게될지 알수없어서
일단 무제한 55를 선택했다.
30년 이상이라 기본료 50%할인은 좋은데
이걸 선택하면 스페셜할인 40인가 50몇만원을 받을 수 없어서
약정할인 12만원 정도만 추가로 받을 수 있댄다.
그래도 계산해본 결과 이게 몇만원 더 싸단다.
그런데 한가지 웃긴 사실은
이 할부프로그램이 하나SK카드사를 통하게 되어있는데
할부금액에 5%인지 4%인지 이자가 붙는다.
그러니까 결론적으로 약정할인이라는 건
카드회사에서 청구하는 할부이자를 제해주는 것 뿐이고
난 결국 순기계값을 통으로 무이자 할부로 사게되는 것이다.
그걸 뭐 대단한 할인이라도 해주는 양
복잡하게 만들어 놓은 꼴이 참 양아치스럽다.
웬지 바보취급당하는 것 같아
집에와서 미국아이폰 가격을 검색했는데
역시 공기계 값은 비슷하다.
미국에서 개통해서 약정기간동안 사용할 거 아니면 말이지.
암튼 SK 여러모로 실망이다.

역시나 SK아이폰 인기가 바닥인지라
23일이라던 예정일 보다 며칠 빠른 17일에 전화기를 받았다.
데이타이전을 해주는 건 좋았지만
기다리고 기다리던 전화기를 난 한 번 만져보지도 못한 상태에서
이사람 저사람 손타는 모습을 보다니...
먼저 한번 만져라도 보게 해주지....
암튼 그렇게 손에 넣은 전화.
묻지도 않고 붙여준 보호필름을 떼어낸 지금 내폰은
순수 알폰 상태.
이렇게 이쁜 전화기에 이것저것 붙이고 싶지 않은데,
다만 유리면 왕창 나간 사진을 한장 보고 나니 좀 걱정이 되긴 한다.
가죽케이스정도는 하나 끼워줘야 할 것 같기도 하고.
하지만 알폰이 정말 이쁜데...

며칠간의 어플탐색으로 종일 폰을 끼고 살았다.
음..남들이 다 권하던 카카오톡.
하지만 나도 모르는 사람들이 자꾸 친구추천에 떠서
자동친구추천은 삭제.

그 사이에 아이북을 받으며 문제가 하나 생겼다.
설정으로 들어가면 어플리스트에는 뜨는데
정작 홈에서는 아이북 아이콘이 안보이는 것.
구글을 찾아보니 그런 사람 꽤 있다.
해결방법은 간단히 전원을 껐다가 다시 켜는 것..
나도 그렇게 해결봤다.

나머지 유용한 어플이라면
나는 아이폰의 동영상에 매우 관심이 많아서
Almost DSLR을 받았다.
편집프로그램은 유료가 많아서 일단 편집이 필요한 상황에서 잘 골라보기로 하고.

알람이 안된다고들 경고를 하던데
유틸리티에서 알람가능하다.
원하는 날짜도 고를 수 있긴 한데
알람소리가 짧은 공지음들이다보니
내가 과연 그 소리에 잘 깰까
의심스럽다.
아직은 이전에 쓰던 핸드폰알람에 의지하는 중.

아이튠 음악도 다 옮겼고
이어폰 쓰기도 좀 알겠고
생각보다 빠른 적응이라고나 할까.
원래 느렸던 문자이니
터치문자도 별로 불만스럽지 않다.
음...가장 신경써야할 건 아무래도
곱게곱게 잘 쓰는 것이겠지.
벌써 집안에서는 몇번의 낙하가 있었지만^^

기대하던 페이스타임은 쓸 사람이 별로 없어 안타깝게 됐고,
데이터 요금제는 생각해봐야할 것 같다.
엄청난 용량을 걱정했지만
TED같은 경우는 와이파이만 지원해서 3G는 아예 쓸일이 없고
유투브로 3G랬자 별로 빠르게 느껴지지 않는다.
인터넷 속도는 대충 맘에 들지만.
3일간 쓴 데이터가 150M정도.
첫날 몰라서 무조건 3G를 켰는데 와이파이로 바꾼 후론 별로

용량 안나가는 것 같다.

와이파이 잘되는 지역이라면
굳이 비싼 데이터요금 쓰지 않아도 될 듯.
오늘 알아낸 팁 하나는 자꾸 끊기는 유튜브를 위해

와이파이 설정 중 DNS설정을 8888,8844로 바꾸는 게 있었는데

나의 경우는 별로 효과 없었다.

또 다른 의견이었던

그냥 사파리로 유튜브 접속하기-가 훨 나았다.

이렇다면 유튜브도 와이 파이로 해결이 되는데

굳이 데이터요금제를 쓸 필요가 있을까.

한달 후에 보자구...

KT아이폰은 통화가 잘 끊긴다는데-심한 사람은 10분에 다섯번 끊겼다고--;;
난 별로 통화를 못해봐서 비교불가.
다만 첫날 상대방 목소리가 되게 작게 들렸었는데
언제부터인가 괜찮아졌다-내가 뭔짓을 했는지는 기억안나는데.
며칠 안됐지만
스마트폰이란 게 생활을 많은 부분 바꾸기도 할 것 같다.
오랫동안 연락이 없던 친구들에게
전화나 문자보다 메신저는 훨씬 편하게 느껴지지 말이다.
그 사이 스마트폰으로 바꾼 사람들이 꽤 있는 것도 신기하고.
암튼 올해의 장난감 득템.

노다메 칸타빌레 최종악장 후편|2010

쥐도 새도 모르게 극장에서 내려가버렸던 노다메칸타빌레 최종악장 후편

(결국 극장에선 반쪽 밖에 못 봤네...)

하필 들고 있던 악보가 슈만이어서 이게 마지막이라는 것이 더 아쉬웠다....

언제 어디서나 쇼팽에 밀리는 슈만...

언뜻 

촘촘했던 드라마와 

시간차 기억을 누비던 유럽편에 최종악장 전편까지의 긴 기다림에 비해 

느닷없는 마지막 같아 보였지만

노다메스러운, 노다메를 위한-그렇다, 결국 주인공은 노다메였다-

따뜻한 격려를 끌어내기 충분한 엔딩이었다.

즐거움은 몰입을 낳고 

몰입은 완성에 대한 야심을 낳으며

그 야심은 괴로움으로 이어지지만 

결국 처음의 즐거움과 다시 만나게 되는

진중한 인생의 뫼비우스의 띠를 

노다메스러운 선명한 색동줄로 인도해 준 느낌이랄까.

시간이 지나고 나이를 먹어도 늘 같은 고민을 하는 것 같아 

스스로를 한심해할 때

같은 고민 같아도 

그게 나선형으로 반경이 넓어지고 있는 것이라는 위로를 들었던 때가 생각났다.

내가 아직 덜 자라서 성장드라마를 이렇게 좋아하는지도--;;

다 자라기도 전에 늙고 있지만....

누구도 들어갈 수 없이 음악들이 빽빽이 막아선 두 사람의 성이 다시 등장했다.

부럽다.

게다가 이번엔 이런 휴게실도 있었다.

더 부럽다.

무엇보다 가슴에 남았던 건 미르히의 마법.
"자기 세계를 만들면 얼마나 즐거운지 알고 싶지 않나?
한 번은 해내고 싶지 않나?"
네, 네, 네, 네,네!!!
루시퍼의 유혹이래도 꼴딱 넘어갈 판에
진심어린 멘토의 전언이라니
노다메 참 복도 많다.
어차피 타고난 재능이라 공평한 것도 아니고,
노다메의 롤러코스터 같은 굴곡이랬자,
세계 최고로 험난했던 것도 아닌데
그래도 샘나기보단 이쁜 걸 어쩌리.
여전히 간바레~용 영화야.

다만 치아키센빠이의 너무나도 야윈 두 뺨이 무척 안타까왔을 뿐.
그 아쉬움은 또 다른 찜남으로 위로^^

EFL Writing: Product and Process

Karen's Linguistics Issues, May 2002 | This Month's Articles | Previous Months

EFL Writing: Product and Process

 by Costas Gabrielatos, Greece

---

This article is based on a seminar, sponsored by Oxford University Press, which I gave to teachers of Omiros Language Schools on January 1998, as well as handouts for RSA/Cambridge Diploma & Certificate sessions I designed between 1994 and 1999 . It was originally published in three parts in ELT News 133, 134 & 135 (March, April & May 2000). In this version (May 2002) I have revised the diagram depicting the cycle of procedures.

---

Introduction

In order to be able to select and use appropriate procedures & materials, as well assess their learners’ needs and progress, teachers need to be clear regarding the desirable outcomes of a writing programme and the processes involved in good writing. In Part 1 look at two typical examples of student writing and identify common problems. In Part 2 I outline the two aspects of good writing: product and process. In Part 3, I present a framework for teaching writing skills, as well as teaching procedures & materials.

---

Part 1. Looking Below the surface 

In this section I will use two texts written by Greek EFL learners as a springboard for my discussion on the ingredients of successful writing (see Part 2). I would like to invite the readers to evaluate the texts and decide on their main merits and problems (keeping in mind the learners’ level) before reading the commentary. 

Example 1

The first text was written by a young teenager at intermediate level. The task was: Write a story which includes the sentence “That was the moment when I realised I was in the wrong place”.      

Original text

It was a lovely day of Sammer before five years and I went with my mother to Athens. 

We began from [placename] in the morning. When we arrive we were going in my uncle’s house. 

We stayed there for an hour and my mother told me that we must have went for shopping before the shops closed. Then I told her that I wanted to stay there and when she bought everything she needs to came back. Next I went with my cousin to play basketball. My cousin saw his friends and told me to wait him. 

I stayed there for a half of hour and I began to came back to the house but I couldn’t find the house when I asked a man if he knew where my uncle’s house was and he told that it was far from there. That was the moment when I realised I was in the wrong place. 

Finaly I was lucky because I found my mother and we came back to my uncle’s house.

I have used this text with more than 200 EFL teachers in different training situations. Each time, the vast majority of the participants thought that grammar and vocabulary were by far the main problem areas, and that this student’s writing would improve considerably with remedial grammar/vocabulary lessons.  

Following is an ‘improved’ version, in which the main grammatical and lexical problems, as well as all spelling mistakes have been corrected. Please read it and answer the following questions: 

1.        Why did the writer and his mother go to Athens?

2.        Why did they visit the writer’s uncle?

3.        Where did the writer’s cousin see his friends?

4.        Why did the cousin ask the writer to wait?

5.        Where did the cousin ask the writer to wait?

6.        How did the writer react?

7.        Why did the writer decide to make his way back home alone?

8.        How/where did he find his mother?

9.        How did the writer feel about his experience?

10.    Did he say anything to his cousin? If yes, how did the cousin respond? If not, why?

‘Improved’ version 

It was a lovely summer day five years ago and I went with my mother to Athens. 

We set out from [placename] in the morning. When we arrived we went to my uncle’s house. 

We stayed there for an hour and my mother told me that we should go shopping before the shops closed. Then I told her that I wanted to stay there and when she had bought everything she needed to come back. Next I went with my cousin to play basketball. My cousin saw his friends and asked me to wait for him. 

I stayed there for half an hour and I began to go back to the house, but I couldn’t find the house when I asked a man if he knew where my uncle’s house was and he told me that it was far from there. That was the moment when I realised I was in the wrong place. 

Finally I was lucky because I found my mother and we came back to my uncle’s house.

None of the questions is answered in the text. The missing elements are the ones which make a story interesting and which readers expect to be told about. As I see it, the learner did not set out to write a story in the first place, but a specific number of words, loosely organised in sentences, on a given ‘topic’. Of course, I am not suggesting that grammar, syntax & vocabulary are not essential for a well-written text. My point is that by over-concentrating on grammar & vocabulary we may ignore other more/ equally important areas. 

The ‘improved’ version makes it easier for us to identify those areas:

·       The text is not a ‘story’, but merely a dry, fragmented account of an event, which holds no interest whatsoever for the reader.

·       The given sentence is used awkwardly: being unable to find your way in an unfamiliar place is not the same as realising that you are ‘in the wrong place’.

·       The learner includes unnecessary details which do not help story development, and may confuse the reader: ‘… we stayed there for an hour’ , ‘… when she had bought everything she needed to come back’.

·       Connectors are misused/overused: ‘… and my mother told me …’ , ‘Then I told her that I wanted to stay there …’, ‘Next I went with my cousin to play basketball’, ‘… I couldn’t find the house when I asked a man if he knew …’.

·       There are misguided attempts at producing complex sentences, which confuse the reader, even if they are grammatically/syntactically ‘correct’: ‘I stayed there for half an hour and I began to go back to the house, but I couldn’t find the house when I asked a man if he knew where my uncle’s house was and he told me that it was far from there’.

Example 2

The following text was written by a Greek FCE candidate (source: UCLES, 1995: 42). Decide on the grade it should be awarded in terms of language (grammar, syntax, vocabulary and spelling).

Athens becomes more and more an attractive place for tourists. Although the city is big, loud and dirty, tourists can find a lot of romantic places to enjoy their vacations. For example the plaka, the historical city. There are a lot of bars and pubs and taverns in old houses which have been restored and they do have some atmosphere you hardly cannot describe.

Exept of this there are of course the classic places like the Acropolis and the Agora, the old market-place. There attractions are for people who are interested in ancient history.

Nevertheless Athens is also famous for good clothings. The clothes here are very often cheaper than in England, France or Germany.

So Athens is a place for many tourists with different interests. And it is not so expensive as for instance Madrid or Paris.

Now look at the task the learner was asked to perform and, again, decide on a grade. 

You recently started to work in local tourism and you had to visit a new tourist attraction (for example, theatre, museum or disco) in your area. You now must write a report for your boss.

Write your report, describing the attraction, what it has to offer to tourists and commenting on its good and bad points (UCLES, 1995: 32).

In terms of language, this seems to be a good piece of work, meriting a ‘pass’ at FCE level. Still, it is unsuccessful for the purpose it was supposed to have been written. The examiners awarded this text a ‘fail’ grade (E). Following are their comments:

“There are some good structures and use of vocabulary but there is no attempt to simulate a report or to cover any of the specific points in the rubric. The target reader would learn nothing about a new attraction and may be confused by expressions incorrectly used.” (UCLES, 1995: 42).

The two examples above show that language accuracy, although important, cannot alone result in effective writing. What is important in writing, both in EFL and in ‘real life’, is for the writer to achieve a goal (‘task achievement’ in EFL).

---

PART 2. ELEMENTS OF GOOD WRITING

Elements Of Good Writing: Product

Following are the elements which characterise effective texts, categorised according to their nature. These are also the elements examiners look for when assessing the writing of candidates for a large number of EFL public examinations. As writing is a complex activity, there is some overlap between the categories. 

The categories below stem from two approaches to writing (source: Johns, 1990): the interactive approach, according to which the writer is “involved in a dialogue with his or her audience” and which holds that “the person primarily responsible for effective communication is the writer” (Hinds, 1987 in Johns, 1990), and the social constructionist approach, according to which “the written product is considered a social act that can take place only within and for a specific context and audience”.

Language 

·       The spelling is correct and consistent (e.g. British vs. American spelling).

·       There is accurate and appropriate use of grammar & syntax.

·       There is accurate and appropriate use, as well as a good range, of vocabulary. 

A note on appropriacy: We can distinguish two aspects of appropriacy. Firstly, the style (or level of formality). Secondly, the tone, that is the attitude communicated through the choice of language (e.g. polite, aggressive, sarcastic). Selection of an appropriate tone depends on the purpose for writing and the conventions of written communication in a particular context. For example, if the purpose of writing a letter of complaint is to ask for some sort of compensation, it may be rather ineffective to adopt either an aggressive or a defensive tone – a letter written in a polite but firm attitude would have much more chances of success. 

A note on range: Although demonstrating command of a rich vocabulary is a definite plus in EFL writing, learners need to be cautious not to go to extremes in their attempt to avoid using the same word/expression again. Misguided use of synonyms/antonyms may communicate a different message from the one intended by the writer, as they may not be interchangeable in terms of denotation, connotation, collocation and level of formality (see Gairns & Redman, 1986: 13-43). 

Layout & Organisation

·       The layout is relevant to the text-type.

·       The text has sections/paragraphs which have a clear focus (see also the note below).

·       The method of organisation is clearly identifiable (e.g. similarity/contrast, for/against, pros/cons, cause/effect, before/after, linear/flashbacks). The organisation can also help the reader understand the content. For example, when the writer provides information in response to a letter by the reader (e.g. Part 1 of the fce Writing Paper) it is helpful if the organisation of the response mirrors the one in the initial letter.

·       There is clear linking between each section/paragraph/sentence and the previous and following one (see also the note below).

·       The punctuation helps the reader understand the organisation.

A note on paragraphs: I have observed that it is common in ELT to present the paragraph as the unit of organisation in learners’ writing, and sometimes provide guidelines on the number of paragraphs a given text should have. For example, learners are usually advised to divide an ‘advantages/disadvantages’ composition into four paragraphs (introduction, advantages, disadvantages, conclusion). I feel that such guidelines misguide rather than help learners. It would be more helpful (and more accurate) to guide learners to think in terms of sections, which may contain one or more paragraphs. For example, if a learner feels that there are more advantages than disadvantages in a given idea/plan, it would be wise to guide him/her to write a three-paragraph section for the advantages and a two-paragraph section for the disadvantages. Learners who are not aware of the distinction between ‘section’ and ‘paragraph’ may combine unrelated elements in one paragraph, or write over-long paragraphs. As a result, the organisation and clarity of the text may suffer.

A note on linking: It is also common practice to advise learners to use linking words/expressions (e.g. furthermore, nevertheless) to make explicit the connection between different parts of the text. Of course, linking devices can help clarity and organisation, but only if they are used properly. I think that the teaching of such devices should be supplemented with awareness-raising as to their suitability for different text types (e.g. level of formality), as well as the teaching of alternative ways of creating text unity (e.g. use of synonyms/antonyms and referring expressions). Learners should also be cautioned against overusing linking devices (e.g. starting almost every sentence with a linking word/expression).

Relevance to the task & regard for the reader 

·       There is appropriate coverage. That is, the writer includes all the points required by the reader/task and avoids introducing irrelevant points.

·       The level of explicitness is the one required by the reader/task. That is, the writer provides the exact amount of information required/needed by the reader. There are two sides to appropriate explicitness. Firstly, the writer only explains what he/she expects the reader doesn’t know, as the opposite may well offend the reader. Secondly, the writer is careful to explain/clarify points which the reader may not be aware of (e.g. cultural-specific elements).

·       The style is appropriate and is used consistently.

·       The tone is consistent with the writer’s purpose. 

Clarity 

·       In a narrative (e.g. story), the reader needs to be clear regarding the sequence or events in time, the characters and their relationship.

·       In argumentative texts the writer’s ideas should be stated clearly and supported by arguments and examples.

·       The link between events and/or arguments should be clear.

---

Elements Of Good Writing: Process  

Following are the steps taken by effective EFL writers when confronted with a writing task. The categories below stem primarily from the process approach to writing (see Johns, 1990; Tribble, 1996; White & Arndt, 1991)

Task/title analysis 

This involves reading the task/title and identifying the following:

·       The writer’s identity, in case the learner is asked to assume a role (e.g. Part 1 of the FCE Writing Paper).

·       The reader’s identity.

·       The relationship between writer & reader and their relative status, which will guide the choice of an appropriate style.

·       The purpose for writing the text (e.g. complaining, providing information) and the reader’s purpose for reading it, which will help decisions about content, coverage and tone.

·       The reader’s relevant knowledge, which will help the choice of the right level of explicitness.

·       The type of text that is to be written. In real life, writers decides on the text type according to their purpose and the conventions which apply to their specific context. In EFL, the current practice is to ask learners explicitly to produce a specific text type.

The following diagram shows the chain of information that the learner can obtain by analysing the task. The diagram also demonstrates how learners can receive clues/guidelines regarding the same element of the written product from different pieces of information given in the task. This is to the learners’ advantage, as they are more likely to identify the essential clues provided in the task.

		TASK
		ò
Style	ï	RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WRITER & READER	ð	Explicitness
Organisation	ï	Assumed READER’S PURPOSE	ð	Content & Coverage
Content & Coverage	ï	WRITER’S PURPOSE	ð	Tone
		Assumed READER’S KNOWLEDGE	ð	Explicitness
Content & Coverage	ï	Backround information
Style	ï	Text type	ð	Organisation
			ð	Layout

Planning

This stage involves making decisions about the following:

·       Content & coverage (relevant ideas and/or required information).

·       Language (level of formality, style and attitude).

·       Layout (according to the type of text).

·       Type of organisation (e.g. similarity/contrast, for/against, pros/cons, cause/effect, before/after, linear account/flashbacks).

·       Sequence in which the events/arguments/ideas will be presented.

A note on planning: There are two basic alternatives for planning, both resulting to the same product (organised notes). They are presented in the following table.  

Take notes as you are brainstorming      è      Organise the notes in sections and/or paragraphs

 

Decide on the number & content of sections and/or paragraphs      è      Take notes relevant to each section and/or paragraph

The most helpful approach is to present learners with both alternatives, as either one may be more suitable for different writing styles and/or tasks.  

Writing the first draft

·       Expanding on the notes. Depending on how comprehensive the notes are, this may mean that the writer either has to only turn the organised notes into sentences, or has to add more elements (e.g. facts, ideas, arguments, examples).

·       Re-organising, if necessary. That is, adding, removing, re-arranging, splitting or combining sections/paragraphs.

·       Linking the different elements so that the text is clear for the reader.

Evaluating & improving on first draft 

·       Reading for global impression. That is, the writer places him/herself in the position of the reader and decides if the text is effective overall.

·       Reading for specific points (relevance to task, coverage, explicitness, organisation, layout, language) and making any necessary alterations.

·       Writing improved/final draft.

---

Language problems vs. Writing problems

In order to help EFL learners become more effective writers, we need to make a crucial distinction between language accuracy and writing skills. That is, a learner may be able to write sentences which are satisfactory for his/her level in terms of grammar, syntax and vocabulary and still be unable to produce an effective text (see previous issue for an example). Of course, in most cases learners will have problems in both areas (language and writing skills). Therefore, it is crucial for us to be able to look beneath the layer of language problems to discover writing problems.

This leads us to another important distinction, the one between grammar/vocabulary development and writing skills development. We need to remember that language input/practice alone cannot result to the development of writing skills. Special ‘writing’ lessons are necessary, in which learners are guided to become aware of all the elements of good writing, supported with information & examples, provided with opportunities for practice, and given focused feedback on their performance. Of course, we can also plan lessons which integrate work on language with work on writing skills. In such cases, it is important for us to be clear about the aims/focus of different stages in the lesson.

---

Part 3. a teaching framework

Writing Skills Development Cycle

The procedures I will propose for a writing skills programme can be seen to form a cycle. Such a view of learning procedures has been proposed by a number of writers (e.g. Altrichter et. al., 1993; Kolb, 1984) and was modified for the teaching of speaking skills in Gabrielatos (1993). The procedures involved and their sequence are presented in the following diagram.  

 

Such a framework explicitly takes into account the following:

Ø         What is taught is not necessarily what is learned. 

Ø         Recycling is essential for learning.

Ø         Learners need to be involved actively in the learning process.

Ø         The more individualised the teaching, the more effective it is. 

This is why the ‘Feedback’ stage is linked directly to (i.e. informs) all other stages. In other words, each stage takes into account the needs of the specific group of learners. Another merit of the cycle is that there is no fixed starting point; that is, a lesson can start at any stage. For example, a teacher starting lessons with a new group of learners can set a writing task and begin the first cycle with feedback on the writing product.  

Following is an outline of the components of this teaching cycle, as well as specific procedures and materials for each stage of the cycle. Teachers can use the procedures flexibly to determine their objectives and scope according to the needs of their learners.

Awareness-raising

In this stage learners are guided to discover/identify specific elements of good writing (see part 2, previous issue) and features of different text types. In a writing programme, the awareness-raising stage always involves reading. In fact, the development of reading skills is indispensable for the development of writing skills. The procedures marked by an asterisk (*) below can also be used for the development of reading skills. After learners have been familiarised with awareness-raising procedures, teachers can set awareness-raising tasks as homework. Such practice can free valuable classroom time for ‘Support’ and ‘Feedback’ procedures.  

Awareness-Raising Procedures

Ø         Analysing a text regarding one or more elements of good writing.

Ø         Analysing a poorly formulated text in order to identify problems and propose remedies and reformulations.

Ø         Analysing (excerpts from) learner texts for merits & shortcomings.

Ø         Comparing two texts in terms of style/register.*

Ø         Ordering jumbled sentences to create a paragraph/text.*

Ø         Ordering jumbled paragraphs to create a text.*

Ø         Inserting additional or missing information into a text (linking & signposting expressions, sentences, paragraphs).*

Ø         Dividing a text into sections/paragraphs. *

Support

In this stage learners are helped to clarify/consolidate the points raised and discussed during the Awareness-raising stage, and/or guided in their efforts to produce a text. Support procedures can be of three different types according to the learners’ needs. Firstly, learners may be given explicit and generalisable information and guidelines, as well as illustrative examples, regarding the organisation, layout and style of specific text-types. Secondly, the teacher may provide help regarding the specific task at hand. For example, learners can be guided to identify the intended reader, the purpose for writing and the points to be covered, as well as helped to generate ideas regarding organisation, vocabulary and grammar. Thirdly, the teacher may elicit and/or pre-teach one or more of the following: relevant vocabulary, grammar, background information.

Support Procedures

Ø         Grammar input/revision & exercises.

Ø         Elicitation and/or input of relevant vocabulary.

Ø         Elicitation and/or input regarding relevant ideas / items of content.

Ø         Elicitation and/or input regarding elements of good writing.

Ø         Planning guidelines (content, layout, organisation, style).

Practice

The Practice stage offers students the chance to use and experiment with the features of good writing discussed in the ‘awareness' stage. In turn, the product of the Practice stage will be used in the Feedback stage. Practice procedures can be categorised according to their focus and the amount of control. In terms of focus, practice can be of two types, focused and global. In focused practice learners concentrate on one element of writing. In global practice learners are given a writing task to achieve. In terms of control, practice can be controlled or free. In controlled practice the aim is on accuracy. Acceptable responses are pre-determined, or there are limitations as to the content of the text to be written. In free practice the aim is effective communication through writing (i.e. achievement of a writing task), and the range of acceptable responses is much greater. The teacher can choose the focus of activities and manipulate the amount of control depending on the learners’ needs. For example, the teacher may give learners a writing task (global practice), but also impose some control over the content by asking them to use a specified number of words/expressions or structures in the text.

Some useful hints

Ø         After focused activities give learners the opportunity to re-integrate the features practised in a global activity.

Ø         Choose motivating topics, relevant to the learners’ age.

Ø         Choose realistic & motivating tasks.

Ø         In global practice always give learners a purpose for writing, as well other information about the context (intended reader, writer’s identity, text type, content & coverage). 

Focused Practice Procedures

Ø         Ordering jumbled sentences to create a paragraph/text.

Ø         Taking & organising notes.

Ø         Dividing a text into sections/paragraphs.

Ø         Combining simple sentences to make complex ones.

Ø         Ordering jumbled paragraphs to create a text.

Ø         Inserting additional or missing information into a text (linking & signposting expressions, sentences, paragraphs).

Ø         Guided planning (content, layout, organisation, style).

 

Global Practice Procedures

Ø         Creating a text according to a model.

Ø         Creating a text from prompts (title, task, text, first/last sentence, key words/expressions, visuals, outline, tables etc.)

Ø         Re-writing a text following specific guidelines (corrections, code, comments etc.).

Feedback

It seems that Feedback is the part of a writing programme which is either underused or misunderstood. Feedback need not be limited to the overt correction of errors and the provision of comments and/or grades by the teacher. Feedback can (and should) be a learning experience, which provides the link between consecutive writing lessons. During feedback, learners are invited to identify the merits and shortcomings of their writing performance, understand the reasons for these shortcomings and discuss possible improvements. When learners have become familiar with feedback procedures, feedback activities can also be set as homework.

In order to make optimal use of the Feedback stage, teachers need to be aware of three basic aspects of feedback procedures. These aspects can be seen as answers to the following three questions:

Ø    Who provides comments/corrections?

Ø    What is the focus of feedback?

Ø    How is feedback given?

Who provides comments/ corrections?

It doesn’t necessarily have to be the teacher. Actually, involving learners actively in feedback is a requirement of the ‘cycle’. Through trying to pinpoint merits and shortcomings in their own or peers’ written texts and propose improvements, the learners’ awareness of elements of good writing  develops, and another learning cycle is set in motion.   

Alternative evaluators

Ø         The teacher.

Ø         The teacher in collaboration with a learner or group of learners.

Ø         Other learners (peer correction). Learners may work individually, in pairs/groups, or as a class.

Ø         The learner him/herself (self-correction).

What is the focus of feedback?

It is advisable that feedback focuses on a limited number of elements. Giving learners feedback on a large number of elements can only confuse them. What is more, limiting feedback to specific elements of writing is consistent with the view of feedback as part of the learning cycle.  

Alternative areas of focus

Ø         Spelling.

Ø         Grammar (accuracy and appropriacy).

Ø         Vocabulary (accuracy and appropriacy).

Ø         Natural use of language.

Ø         Linking and signposting expressions.

Ø         Layout.

Ø         Organisation.

Ø         Clarity of expression.

Ø         Regard for reader (e.g. level of explicitness).

Ø         The area(s) which the previous lesson(s) focused on.

Ø         Only what affects clarity / task achievement.

How is feedback given?

Feedback procedures cannot be used indiscriminately of the problem area. There are procedures which are more suitable for feedback on vocabulary and grammar mistakes, and others which are more effective for the treatment of problems in other areas (e.g. style, organisation, coverage, relevance). The feedback procedures outlined overleaf have been adapted from Tribble (1996) and White & Arndt (1991). 

Feedback on vocabulary & grammar 

The techniques below are given in order of increasing difficulty for the learner, in that they provide a decreasing amount of support. 

Ø         Correct error directly (i.e. cross out incorrect part and write correct version).

Ø         Underline, indicate type and refer learners to a reference book  (e.g. grammar book, or grammar section in the coursebook).

Ø         Underline the error and indicate the type on the margin.

Ø         Underline the error.

Ø         Indicate the type of error(s) on the margin. The teacher needs to familiarise learners with the coding system that will be used.

Ø         Indicate the number of errors in each line on the margin.

 

Feedback on other areas

Ø         Comments and guidance questions on the margin and/or at the end of the text.

Ø         Teacher-learner conference: teacher and learner/pair/group collaborate as co-writers to write and/or improve specific parts of a text. Conference can take part either while learners write a text in class or after its completion.

Ø         Reformulation: the teacher or learner (in the case of peer-correction) checks what a learner wants to express in a problematic part of the text and rewrites it. This technique can also take place during conferencing.

Ø         Self/peer correction using a checklist: the teacher formulates a checklist based on the elements of good writing (see part 2, previous issue) – the learners (individually, in pairs/groups, or as a class) evaluate a text using the checklist and suggest improvements. This technique is particularly suited to exam-prep classes, as it trains the learners to evaluate and improve their own writing.

Ø         The teacher collects problematic excerpts on a handout or overhead transparency. Learners in pairs/groups or as a class (with the teacher’s guidance) identify problems and suggest improvements.

Ø         The teacher adopts the role of the intended reader and reacts to the text in a realistic way (e.g. by ‘sending’ a short reply, or ‘calling’ the writer.

---

Conclusion

EFL Writing is a complex skill, and its development involves much more than the accurate use of grammar and a good range of vocabulary. A comprehensive EFL Writing programme requires the systematic treatment of a large number of interrelated elements. In this article I presented a cyclical framework of teaching procedures comprising four stages: awareness-raising, support, practice and feedback.

---

References

Altrichter, H., P. Posch & B. Somekh (1993). Teachers Investigate Their Work. Routledge.

Gabrielatos, C. (1993). ‘Learning How To Fish: Fostering fluency & independence.’ TESOL Greece Newsletter 38. (Also at http://www.geocities.com/cgabrielatos/LearningHowToFish.htm).

Gairns, R. & S. Redman (1986). Working with Words. Cambridge University Press.

Johns, A.M. (1990). ‘L1 composition theories: implications for developing theories of L2 composition.’ In B. Kroll (ed.) Second Language Writing: Research insights from the classroom. Cambridge University Press.

Kolb, D. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.

Tribble, C. (1996). Writing. Oxford University Press.

UCLES (1995). First Certificate in English: Specifications and Sample Papers for the Revised FCE Examination.

White, R. & V. Arndt. (1991). Process Writing. Longman.

---

Bio note

Costas Gabrielatos has extensive experience in ELT and language teacher education as teacher/lecturer and materials/course designer. He holds an MPhil in English & Applied Linguistics (Cambridge), an RSA/Cambridge Diploma with distinction, and a Degree in Economics (Athens). His interests revolve around the implications of language analysis for ELT. He is currently working towards a PhD at Lancaster University.

Website: www.geocities.com/cgabrielatos 

---

 

©Costas Gabrielatos 2002. All rights reserved.