Four transformations, one insecure rule
In a PAU use-of-English drill, Marc has to rewrite four sentences without changing the meaning. The exercise is worth 4 marks, one per sentence, and the rubric says 'Do not change the original meaning'. His answers are:
- 'The council will plant 500 trees next spring.' → '500 trees will be plant next spring.'
- 'I didn't know the rules, so I didn't apply for the grant.' → 'If I knew the rules, I would apply for the grant.'
- 'The manager told us: "You must submit the form by Friday."' → 'The manager told us we must submit the form by Friday.'
- 'It's possible that the event will be cancelled.' → 'The event can be cancelled.' He loses marks on 1 and 2, and his teacher says 3 and 4 are also insecure.
1. Correct answers 1 and 2 and explain the grammatical rule each candidate has misapplied.
Read the worked answer
1 should be '500 trees will be planted next spring'. The passive is formed with the correct form of 'be' + past participle; Marc has used the base form 'plant' after 'be'. 2 should be 'If I had known the rules, I would have applied for the grant.' The original describes an unreal past situation, so it needs a third conditional. Marc's second conditional ('If I knew... I would apply') changes the meaning to a present/future hypothetical and implies he still may apply. The rule is not 'if + past = past' but 'distance in form signals distance from reality': past perfect for the unreal past, 'would have + participle' for the unreal result.
2. Decide whether answer 3 should be marked correct, incorrect or 'correct with a caveat', and justify using reported speech rules.
Read the worked answer
Answer 3 is best treated as insecure rather than fully wrong. In reported speech, 'must' can be backshifted to 'had to' when the obligation is reported later: 'The manager told us we had to submit the form by Friday.' Keeping 'must' is acceptable only if the obligation is still in force at the moment of reporting and the speaker wants to stress it. In an exam transformation with no clear reporting time, the safest answer is 'had to'. The teacher should award the mark only if the rubric accepts both, or ask for 'had to' to show control of backshift.
3. Explain why 'can' is an inadequate transformation of 'It's possible that...' and give two better options.
Read the worked answer
'Can' is not a good equivalent of 'It's possible that...'. 'Can' typically expresses ability ('She can swim') or general/theoretical possibility ('Temperatures can fall below zero here'), not a specific present likelihood. It also suggests the event has the capacity to be cancelled, which is odd. Better options are 'may be cancelled', 'might be cancelled' or 'could be cancelled'. 'May' is the most neutral modal of possibility; 'might' and 'could' suggest a slightly more remote possibility. The transformation should preserve the modal meaning, not just the passive form.