Wednesday 3th June:
- Group 9
This presentation is characterized by an excessive use of reading due to the fact that they were rather nervous. It is also highly noticeable the presence of some mistakes related to spelling while they were exposing. Regarding pronunciation, it is considered to be good.
- Group 8
If we pay attention to the way of speaking, one of these girls pronounced very well her part of the work, giving the impression of being a native pronunciation. It is also necessary to take into account their originality when presenting a curious video related to the Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. It gave dynamism to their presentation, which made it different from the rest of them.
- Group 7
One of the most relevant features to point out in this presentation is the lack of time offered to the audience to see carefully their PowerPoint. We consider that slides were played too quickly to be read correctly. Besides, they did not include a conclusion and a bibliography. Moreover, one of them was quite nervous but, in general, they made it well.
Friday 5th June:
- Group 6
Although this presentation was shorter than what it should have been, the three components delivered a good intervention, especially the second woman talking who showed a wonderful ability speaking to the audience. They made a good introduction, a well- built work inside and a final conclusion. They had a good pronunciation but they failed repeating too many times the same words.
- Group 5
This presentation was framed by a good introduction followed by different well-developed linguistic aspects. They talked about stylistic devices with examples such as comparisons and similes, a point which had not been seen before. They also talked about changes in the word order. However, the most interesting parts were the ones related to semantics, with allusions to words which do not longer exist as well as synonyms and also an out of the ordinary explanation of metrics.
- Group 4
This group performed a short presentation divided in three parts: plot, phonology and etymology, with a brief introduction and conclusion. In our opinion, they were very theoretical with the concepts they dealt with and some of them read most of the time, a feature which made the public got bored with their delivery. The plot of their fragment was divided in three parts that they explained correctly. Talking about etymology, they showed the changes of words across time.
- Group 3
This group was formed by three girls who were very skilled in what he delivery is concerned. The first one had a lovely pronunciation making use of her memory and confidence to create a good oral result. She even memorised the Middle English fragment she had to perform. The second explained a very interesting content and the last one, although being faster than the two previous, could handle her part with no problems. The most significant feature of their presentation was a table containing references to Old English declensions to compare them with the Middle English situation.
- Group 2
This group was innovative in the sense that they included a recording to show how their Middle English text was read. Apart from that, their presentation had also a map referring to the Indo-European languages to show the influences they had in the English language. The PowerPoint’s division was good and it included different grammatical aspects but the only thing to highlight in a negative way is that they didn’t communicate with the audience, making more attention to what they had prepared than to the people they were talking to.
- Group 1
- Group 9
This presentation is characterized by an excessive use of reading due to the fact that they were rather nervous. It is also highly noticeable the presence of some mistakes related to spelling while they were exposing. Regarding pronunciation, it is considered to be good.
- Group 8
If we pay attention to the way of speaking, one of these girls pronounced very well her part of the work, giving the impression of being a native pronunciation. It is also necessary to take into account their originality when presenting a curious video related to the Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales. It gave dynamism to their presentation, which made it different from the rest of them.
- Group 7
One of the most relevant features to point out in this presentation is the lack of time offered to the audience to see carefully their PowerPoint. We consider that slides were played too quickly to be read correctly. Besides, they did not include a conclusion and a bibliography. Moreover, one of them was quite nervous but, in general, they made it well.
Friday 5th June:
- Group 6
Although this presentation was shorter than what it should have been, the three components delivered a good intervention, especially the second woman talking who showed a wonderful ability speaking to the audience. They made a good introduction, a well- built work inside and a final conclusion. They had a good pronunciation but they failed repeating too many times the same words.
- Group 5
This presentation was framed by a good introduction followed by different well-developed linguistic aspects. They talked about stylistic devices with examples such as comparisons and similes, a point which had not been seen before. They also talked about changes in the word order. However, the most interesting parts were the ones related to semantics, with allusions to words which do not longer exist as well as synonyms and also an out of the ordinary explanation of metrics.
- Group 4
This group performed a short presentation divided in three parts: plot, phonology and etymology, with a brief introduction and conclusion. In our opinion, they were very theoretical with the concepts they dealt with and some of them read most of the time, a feature which made the public got bored with their delivery. The plot of their fragment was divided in three parts that they explained correctly. Talking about etymology, they showed the changes of words across time.
- Group 3
This group was formed by three girls who were very skilled in what he delivery is concerned. The first one had a lovely pronunciation making use of her memory and confidence to create a good oral result. She even memorised the Middle English fragment she had to perform. The second explained a very interesting content and the last one, although being faster than the two previous, could handle her part with no problems. The most significant feature of their presentation was a table containing references to Old English declensions to compare them with the Middle English situation.
- Group 2
This group was innovative in the sense that they included a recording to show how their Middle English text was read. Apart from that, their presentation had also a map referring to the Indo-European languages to show the influences they had in the English language. The PowerPoint’s division was good and it included different grammatical aspects but the only thing to highlight in a negative way is that they didn’t communicate with the audience, making more attention to what they had prepared than to the people they were talking to.
- Group 1
This group developed a very well-formed presentation with different points regarding to etymology, phonology, scansion, grammar, syntax and the content of their fragment. The three components created a very attractive PowerPoint which attracted visually the spectator, with graphics, images and different colours. The etymological analysis was very complete talking about evolution, variations and origin and in the phonological examination, they mentioned and explained the Great Vowel Shift making use of their text together with a piece of reading in Middle English. It clearly seems that they had worked hard.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario