Listening: the kuia who has not said yes
An ākonga is preparing for the Level 3 listening assessment and has been given a three-minute recording of an interview with a kuia, 68, who has been asked to chair her marae trust. The recording is played twice, with a 30-second pause between plays. In the interview the kuia says, 'Kāore anō au kia whakaae... engari me whakaaro anō pea.' Later she says 'kei te pai' when the interviewer asks whether the marae has good support, and 'āe, ka taea' when asked whether she could attend the next hui. The ākonga's notes read: 'She agrees to be chair because she says āe, ka taea.' The teacher points out that the notes may have missed the difference between agreeing to attend a meeting and accepting a role. The recording includes overlapping laughter and a change of topic, and one word is unclear because of wind noise on the marae atea. The ākonga must decide what the kuia's actual position is and how confident that judgement can be.
1. What is the kuia's position on chairing the trust, and which two features of her speech most strongly support your answer?
Read the worked answer
She has not accepted the role; she is deferring. The strongest cue is the clause 'Kāore anō au kia whakaae' - 'I have not yet agreed'. The particle anō marks an unfinished state, not a refusal and not an acceptance. The second cue is 'engari me whakaaro anō pea', where engari signals a qualification and pea hedges the possibility. Those two features belong together: she is leaving the decision open.
The later 'āe, ka taea' answers a question about attending a hui, not about chairing. 'Kei te pai' answers a question about marae support. Treating either as acceptance transfers an answer across question boundaries, which is the main error in the notes. Confidence is high on 'not yet accepted', lower on whether she will eventually say yes. The wind noise affects one word, but not the key clauses, so it does not undermine the judgement.
2. If 'engari me whakaaro anō pea' were replaced by 'nō reira, ka whakaae au', how would your interpretation change? Explain the discourse function of the replacement.
Read the worked answer
The replacement would turn a deferral into a performed decision. Nō reira is a consequential connector - 'therefore, so' - and ka whakaae au is an explicit commitment. The original engari creates a contrast after kāore anō, which keeps the matter open; removing it closes the sequence.
You would then read 'āe, ka taea' differently: it would be consistent with an acceptance rather than a separate answer about attendance. Confidence would rise because an explicit commitment verb has been used. One caution remains: if 'ka whakaae au' were followed by laughter or a topic change, it could be ironic or provisional. Discourse markers raise or lower confidence; they do not automatically settle tone. The exam-safe answer is to state the changed meaning and then name the evidence that would confirm or weaken it.