Scholarship Deadline Email: Grammar, Agreement, and Register
A candidate is editing a 140-word email to a scholarship office before a 15 March, 17:00 deadline. The draft asks for a 48-hour extension because a transcript and two recommendation letters are late. The candidate's referee has already emailed the registrar twice. The draft contains: (1) "I am writing to respectfully request that my application deadline is extended by 48 hours." (2) "Neither the transcript nor the recommendation letters has arrived." (3) "Me and my referee have contacted the registrar twice." (4) "I would be grateful if you could consider to grant an extension." A reviewer marks (4) as "too demanding" and asks for a formal, deferential register. The candidate has 20 minutes to revise and must keep the email under 150 words.
1. Correct sentences (1)–(3) and explain the grammar decision in each.
Read the worked answer
(1) Use the subjunctive after "request that": "I am writing to respectfully request that my application deadline be extended by 48 hours." In formal American English, "be extended" is the base form; British English may allow "should be extended." The original "is extended" treats the request as an existing fact rather than a desired action. (2) With "neither ... nor," the verb agrees with the nearer subject: "letters" is plural, so use "have arrived." The original "has" agrees with "transcript," which is not the nearer subject. (3) The pronoun is part of the subject, so use the subject case: "My referee and I have contacted the registrar twice." "Me" is object case; placing the other person first is also conventional courtesy.
2. Revise sentence (4) for grammar and register. Explain why your version is more deferential without being vague.
Read the worked answer
A corrected version is: "I would be very grateful if you would consider granting a 48-hour extension." The verb "consider" takes a gerund, so "consider granting," not "consider to grant." For register, "would be very grateful" and "if you would consider" frame the request as a possibility for the reader to evaluate rather than as an expectation. The revision still states the exact length of the extension, so it is not vague. "Consider to grant" is also ungrammatical, but the reviewer's "too demanding" comment is about tone: the original reads as though the office should grant the request once the grammar is fixed.
3. The candidate wants to add "as soon as possible" after "extension." Does this improve or harm the register? Explain using the deadline details.
Read the worked answer
It harms the register. The email already names a 15 March, 17:00 deadline and asks for only 48 hours, so the urgency is clear from the facts. "As soon as possible" adds pressure without new information and can sound like a demand on the reader's time. A more deferential move is to give the specific date by which a decision would help, for example, "by 14 March if possible," and to acknowledge the office's constraints. The candidate should rely on precise dates and a softened modal frame rather than on an urgency phrase.