la formation et l'usage du subjonctif en français

I talked, a while back, about when to use the subjunctive mood in French. This time around, I'd like to talk about how to conjugate verbs properly in the subjunctive. It's not that hard. After you read the following, you can reinforce your knowledge by reading about the subjunctive mood over at About.com.

I. LA FORMATION DU SUBJONCTIF

The basic rule for forming a subjunctive conjugation, both for regular verbs and for many (if not most) irregular verbs, is this:

que + [verb stem] + [verb ending]
[NB: The "que" isn't always present, but it's generally there.]

The verb stem is formed this way:

3rd-person plural conjugation (ils form), minus "-ent"

The verb endings are almost the same as the endings for regular -er verbs; just watch out for the nous and vous forms:

-e
-es
-e
-ions
-iez
-ent

So, for example, if I wanted to use the regular verbs parler, choisir, and attendre, their subjunctive conjugations would look like this:

PARLER (ils parlent... parl- + endings)

que je parle
que tu parles
qu'il parle
que nous parlions
que vous parliez
qu'ils parlent


CHOISIR (ils choisissent... choisiss- + endings)

que je choisisse
que tu choisisses
qu'il choisisse
que nous choisissions
que vous choisissiez
qu'ils choisissent


ATTENDRE (ils attendent... attend- + endings)

que j'attende
que tu attendes
qu'il attende
que nous attendions
que vous attendiez
qu'ils attendent


Many irregular verbs also follow this pattern:

SORTIR, PARTIR, DORMIR, CONNAITRE

que je sorte, que je parte, que je dorme, que je connaisse
que tu sortes, que tu partes, que tu dormes, que tu connaisses
qu'il sorte, qu'il parte, qu'il dorme, qu'il connaisse
que nous sortions, que nous partions, que nous dormions, que nous connaissions
que vous sortiez, que vous partiez, que vous dormiez, que vous connaissiez
qu'ils sortent, qu'ils partent, qu'ils dorment, qu'ils connaissent


The "e-consonant-er" verbs (jeter, appeler, préférer, etc.) generally follow the regular pattern except for the nous/vous forms:

que je jette
que tu jettes
qu'il jette
que nous jetions (only one "t"!)
que vous jetiez (one "t"!)
qu'ils jettent

que je préfère
que tu préfères
qu'il préfère
que nous préférions (accent aigu!)
que vous préfériez (accent aigu!)
qu'ils préfèrent

(etc.)

For almost all of the above types of verbs, the nous/vous forms look exactly like the nous/vous forms of the imperfect tense.


Some verbs, however, form their stems in an irregular way:

savoir ➞ sach-
faire ➞ fass-
pouvoir ➞ puiss-
aller ➞ aill- / all- (nous/vous forms only)
vouloir ➞ veuill- / voul- (nous/vous forms only)
prendre ➞ prenn- / pren- (nous/vous forms only)

avoir ➞ totally irregular:
que j'aie
que tu aies
qu'il ait
que nous ayons
que vous ayez
qu'ils aient

être ➞ also totally irregular:
que je sois
que tu sois
qu'il soit
que nous soyons
que vous soyez
qu'ils soient

There's more, but that ought to cover the basics for now.



II. L'USAGE DU SUBJONCTIF

In my other post, I talked about when to use the subjunctive mood. Be especially careful about verbs like croire and penser, which do NOT take the subjunctive in the affirmative, but which DO take the subjunctive in the negative, because the negative is an expression of doubt. Examples:

Je pense qu'il est cinglé. (I think he's nuts.)
Je ne pense pas qu'il soit cinglé. (I don't think he's nuts.)

Elle croit que son amie est là. (She thinks her friend is there.)
Elle ne croit pas que son amie soit là. (She doesn't think her friend is there.)


III. QUIZ

So! If you've read this post thoroughly, and you've read the other post (to which I've linked twice), then maybe you're ready for a two-part quiz. Part I will be about whether to use the subjunctive. Part II will concentrate on how to conjugate the subjunctive.

Part I: to use, or not to use...?

Ask yourself: do I use the subjunctive in this situation, or not? Choose the correct conjugation, whether it be indicative or subjunctive.

1. Il faut que tu (es / sois) là à 3 heures.

2. Il pense que son frère (est / soit) doué aux langues.

3. Elle veut que sa mère (est / soit) plus compréhensive.

4. Il est absolument impératif que tu (sors / sortes) la poubelle!

5. Oh là là, comme je suis contente que tu (es / sois) venue!

6. Je doute fort qu'il (peut / puisse) le faire.

7. Je crains (craindre = to fear) que tu (n'as / n'aies) tort.

8. Il me dit qu'il (sait / sache) jouer du piano.

9. Nous savons qu'il (est / soit) nécessaire d'étudier.

10. Gérard ne (veut / veuille) pas prendre son déjeuner dans la cafétéria.

11. Etudie afin que tu (réussis / réussisses) à l'examen.

12. Avant que tes parents (ne sont / ne soient) ici, il faut nettoyer la maison!

13. Nous (sommes / soyons) contents que tu te trouves parmi nous en France.

14. Bill ne s'approche pas du tigre de peur qu'il (n'est / ne soit) mangé.

15. La seule chose que je (sais / sache), c'est que personne n'est parfait.


ANSWERS (highlight inside the brackets to see): [ (1) sois; (2) est; (3) soit; (4) sortes; (5) sois; (6) puisse; (7) n'aies; (8) sait; (9) est; (10) veut, (11) réussisses; (12) ne soient; (13) sommes; (14) ne soit; (15) sache ]


Part II: proper conjugation

Conjugate the verbs properly.

1. que tu (connaître)

2. qu'on (réfléchir)

3. qu'ils (avoir)

4. que je (mettre)

5. que tu (appeler)

6. que vous (vouloir)

7. que je (être)

8. que nous (aller)

9. qu'elles (vendre)

10. que tu (prendre)

11. qu'on (haïr, to hate)

12. que nous (manger)

13. que vous (savoir)

14. qu'on (pouvoir)

15. qu'ils (faire)


ANSWERS (highlight inside the brackets to see): [ (1) connaisses; (2) réfléchisse; (3) aient; (4) mette; (5) appelles; (6) vouliez; (7) sois; (8) allions; (9) vendent; (10) prennes; (11) haïsse; (12) mangions; (13) sachiez; (14) puisse; (15) fassent ]



_

la sexualité: un sondage

Voici un petit sondage fait dans onze pays (y compris la France) intérrogeant les citoyens sur leur sexualité (positions sexuelles préférées, etc.). Quelques-uns des résultats vous seront un peu surprenants, j'imagine...


_

so you think you speak Amurrican

A quick test for people who think they know American English! Select the answer that is most American and/or most grammatically correct.

1. Which is correct?

a. Thanks Fred.
b. Thanks, Fred.


2. Let's just leave this _____ .

a. between you and I
b. between you and me


3. She's a real _____ .

a. trouper
b. trooper


4. If I _____ I wouldn't have farted in the tub.

a. could have known about her phobia,
b. had known about her phobia,


5. Give this prize to _____ ate the most hot dogs.

a. whoever
b. whomever


6. Which is correct?

a. She said, "Sit down."
b. She said, "Sit down".


7. If you want to succeed in this company, _____ and don't make waves.

a. tow the line
b. toe the line


8. That was a strange proposition to Fred and _____ .

a. I
b. me


9. I try to brush my teeth _____ .

a. everyday
b. every day


10. This restaurant has a great _____ .

a. ambience
b. ambiance
c. either A or B
d. neither


11. I saw her in the woods-- _____ .

a. butt naked
b. buck naked


12. When I finally found her ring and ran up, gasping, to give it to her, she sighed and said, "_____ ."

a. Never mind
b. Nevermind


13. I'll _____ be there.

a. definately
b. definitely


14. The sky boomed with thunder and sizzled with _____ .

a. lightning
b. lightening


15. Visiting the White House is quite a _____ !

a. priviledge
b. privilege


16. I'm not _____ to being set up on a blind date.

a. adverse
b. averse


17. _____ elementary, Watson.

a. It's
b. Its


18. I felt so _____ about how disastrous her birthday party was.

a. bad
b. badly


19. Despite the chaos around him, Phineas was _____ .

a. unfazed
b. unphased


20. Which is correct?

a. I wonder where my car went.
b. I wonder where my car went?


21. She stared in frank amazement at his _____ salmon.

a. enormous, twenty inch
b. enormous twenty-inch


22. As the Titanic tilted crazily, she held _____ the railing for dear life.

a. onto
b. on to


23. Watch out for the thundering _____ !

a. hoard
b. horde


24. All that has happened has been in accordance with the _____ .

a. prophesy
b. prophecy


25. Einstein, not merely a genius, was a kind _____ he once rescued a treed cat.

a. soul;
b. soul,



How'd you do?

Answers follow; highlight the space between the brackets to see them.

[1. B; 2. B; 3. A; 4. B; 5. A; 6. A; 7. B; 8. B; 9. B; 10. C; 11. B; 12. A; 13. B; 14. A; 15. B; 16. B; 17. A; 18. A; 19. A; 20. A; 21. B; 22. B; 23. B; 24. B; 25. A]

Scale of Achievement:

25: "I am a Jedi, like my father before me."
24: "Impressive. Most impressive."
20-23: "You are not a Jedi yet."
15-19: "You will pay the price for your lack of vision."
10-14: "Scruffy-looking nerfherder!"
5-9: "Your feeble skills are no match for the power of the dark side!"
1-4: "I have a bad feeling about this."
0: "Noooooooooooo!"

What language rant topics do the above questions cover? Highlight the [bracketed area below] to see.

[1. vocative comma: always use when addressing someone!
2. pronoun case: object of preposition
3. diction (trouper = member of troupe = stalwart team player, not a soldier)
4. verb tense in conditional sentences: if (pluperfect) ➞ main (conditional past)
5. pronoun case: "whoever" is correct as subject of clause
6. US vs. UK punctuation (too many Americans forget what country they live in)
7. idioms: people put their toes up against the painted line
8. pronoun case: don't be an idiot and use a subject pronoun when an object pronoun is called for
9. adverb of frequency = every day; "everyday" = adjective meaning "ordinary"
10. spelling trivia: some words have more than one acceptable spelling
11. idioms: village idiots mishear this as "butt nekkid"
12. compounds: or, more precisely, when not to use compounds
13. spelling: there is no "a" in "definitely"!!!!!
14. spelling/diction: "lightening" comes from the verb "to lighten (a load, the sky, etc.)"
15. spelling: no "d" in "privilege"
16. diction: adverse [conditions], averse [attitude]
17. spelling/diction: it's = it is; its = possessive adjective
18. diction: with a linking verb like "feel," you need a predicate adjective, not an adverb
19. spelling/diction: only someone who had never actually read the word "to faze" would get this wrong
20. mood: "I wonder" is always declarative-- NEVER interrogative!
21. punctuation: hyphenate phrasal adjectives before a noun; no comma for non-coordinate adjectives
22. diction: the phrasal verb's infinitive form is "to hold on" not "to hold onto," which makes the "to" separate
23. spelling/diction: you'd have to be a moron not to get this one
24. spelling/diction: as above. "Prophesy" (-"sigh") is a verb; prophecy (-"see") is a noun
25. punctuation: a semicolon separates two related or contrastive clauses]

don't overcorrect!

I find myself increasingly annoyed by the smug idiots who say, "Decimate does not mean destroy: it means remove or kill a tenth of."

Folks, decimate may have had that latter meaning as its only meaning when the word first came into existence, but nowadays, it's perfectly fine to say The bomb decimated the city. This might not imply total destruction, but the word in modern English can mean anything up to near-total destruction. It's a perfectly fine descriptor of what a bomb can do.

People who make such foolish "corrections" are mistaking original meanings for proper meanings. Notions of proper change with the times. The next time someone tries to tell you you're misusing decimate, ask him whether he thinks his best friend is a nice person. When he says "yes," look shocked and ask him whether he really believes his friend is foolish and stupid. This is, after all, the older-- and therefore proper!-- use of the word nice.

Right?

I once heard a man of Scottish extraction claim that no self-respecting Scotsman would ever use the term "Scotch-Irish." "Scotch is a drink!" he said, to much polite laughter from a crowd that knew no better. "The proper term is "Scots-Irish." But he was wrong: "Scotch" is a perfectly serviceable term in the perfectly legitimate expression "Scotch-Irish." Wikipedia has an interesting write-up on this expression, and notes that "Scotch-Irish" is current only in North America, while "Scots-Irish" is a term of more recent invention, and is also confined to North American usage.

This makes our man wrong twice over: if "Scotch-Irish" isn't heard outside of North America (the demographic in question is apparently referred to as "Ulster Scots" in the UK), then how does calling oneself "Scots-Irish" prove that one is a self-respecting Scotsman? This terminological quibble seems to have little, if anything, to do with the monikers used in the Old Country, and that reinforces the point I'm making in this post: in trying to sound smart, don't sound stupid.

(Click this link to see the etymology of nice.)


ADDENDUM: Here's an interesting article on the "singular they."


_

sentence equivalence!

Here's a GRE Sentence Completion problem from Manhattan Prep's blog.

The exhibit is not so much a retrospective as a __________ ; the artist’s weaker early work is glossed over and any evidence of his ultimate dissolution is absent entirely.

Select two correct answers.

(A) paean
(B) philippic
(C) tirade
(D) panacea
(E) eulogy
(F) crescendo

In the revised GRE's Sentence Completion section, the object of the game is to select TWO words that are each capable of (1) completing the sentence correctly and (2) giving the sentence a similar meaning. In other words, the words you select need to be either synonyms or almost-synonyms. Two antonyms might conceivably complete the sentence, but this would violate criterion (2). To get around this problem, the GRE Sentence Completion questions are designed so that a pair of antonyms can't be selected without one or the other word in the selected pair sounding ridiculous in context.

Have at it, then click the above link for the answer and explanation. I was able to answer correctly despite not knowing the meaning of "philippic," which is not a word I'd normally expect to see on the GRE.


_

David Gelernter on "cyber-English"

From here:

Social networking, texting, email and digital messages have borrowed the keys to the English language and are joy-riding all over the landscape, smashing body panels and junking up the fancy interior. Many thoughtful people are worried. But it's good for English to get shaken up occasionally—by people who are using it in new ways, not by academics ordaining from on high.

In the 1980s and '90s, email saved the personal letter from extinction by moving it online. Email-writers have leaned heavily for decades on abbreviations, which suit this quick-and-casual medium. Thus the celebrated "lol," "laughing out loud," and many others.

When the young members of Generation-i use their phones to send text messages, the small keyboards make typing awkward and abbreviations even more important: "b4n" (bye for now), "cu" (see you). Texters, social-network posters and emailers are all prone to write (as their messages go zipping and hurtling back and forth) in sharp-edged shards and slivers of language.

Abbreviations and fragments are a language's normal response to stress. Medieval language is dense with abbreviations, because writing material was expensive and books could be published only by copying. Today the stresses are different but the response is familiar.

When you are forced to compress your message into fewer words, each word works harder, carries more meaning on its shoulders and, accordingly, becomes more important and interesting. Digital English is no good for poetry or novels, but on balance it's refreshing.

What are your thoughts on the evolution of English? Linguists take it as axiomatic that English-- as with any language-- is constantly evolving. Language purists, however, bemoan the various ways in which the language changes. The difference between these detached observers (the linguists), on one hand, and the so-called "language Nazis" (the purists), on the other, is the difference between descriptivism and prescriptivism. A linguistic descriptivist simply describes what's happening to language; a prescriptivist, by contrast, considers him- or herself to be an authority on the proper forms of that language: s/he prescribes the correct forms and usage.

Every English teacher is at least a partial prescriptivist in that sense, concerning him- or herself with proper and coherent forms of self-expression. Every dictionary, meanwhile, is both descriptivistic and prescriptivistic: dictionaries describe language as it's spoken and written in that dictionary's era (invoking histories and etymologies along the way), but they also act as authorities on proper usage, spelling, pronunciation, etc. We don't merely read dictionaries; we consult them.

I've written quite a few posts on this blog that are prescriptivistic in tone. It might surprise students to learn that I'm also a bit of a descriptivist: I believe that language has a structure, and that there are proper and improper forms of expression, but I also think it's only natural for language to evolve. That is the way of things-- the way of the Force, as Yoda might say. Shakespeare sounds old because language constantly changes; the 1950s expression "Daddy-o" sounds old to young ears (it sounds old to my ears, since I was born in the late 1960s!); even expressions from the 70s, like "Right on!" and "Keep on truckin'!" sound antiquated. How many students nowadays would be able to use 1980s high-school slang with a straight face? "You dweeb!" "You spaz!" Who talks like that anymore? Even 1990s slang like "Whoop-- my bad" sounds a bit hackneyed. In 2012, portmanteaux rule: slammed-together word combos that express complex concepts in a single compound. In 2012, we've got frenemies and we're chillaxin'; ambivalent people can be forgainst something. By 2020, those same portmanteaux might seem embarrassingly cliché.

Take a step back from the lexical swirl, though, and notice that most of the linguistic evolution is occurring only at the superficial level of slang. Basic structures-- e.g., syntax-- take much longer to change. Shakespeare is still comprehensible after 500 years because we moderns still use the same basic grammar and most of the same basic vocabulary.

So I don't think Mr. Gelernter is wrong to note that English needs to be shaken up every now and then. But we also need to remember that speaking and writing a language don't mean speaking or writing whatever we want, however we want. If I point at a bird and yell "Police car! Police car!", who can blame any observers for thinking I'm crazy? Language evolves, but this doesn't remove the notion of right and wrong from language learning.


_

Ave, Lexilogos!

Pour ceux qui s'efforcent de parler et écrire uniquement en français, j'ai le grand plaisir de présenter une ressource lexique détaillée et fiable: Lexilogos, dictionnaire français en ligne. C'est un dictionnaire "français-français" et non pas "français-anglais/anglais-français." Il représente un effort inimaginable-- un recueil de mots tout avec des notes étymologiques, phonétiques, morphologiques, etc. Utilisable par l'apprenant et le vétéran.


_

jealousy vs. envy, personality vs. character

"You got a new car? I'm so jealous!"

Not so fast: I'm inclined to say that you're actually envious. What's the difference between jealousy and envy? Well, these two words are often used interchangeably, but a more proper reckoning of their respective definitions would be that envy refers to coveting what one doesn't have, whereas jealousy refers more to a greedy possessiveness about what one already has.

In simple terms: you're envious of what you don't have; you're jealous of what you do have.

Examples:

1. A jealous husband won't let his wife talk with other men.

2. The dragon jealously guards its treasure.

3. When Martha saw her friend's new car, she became envious and wanted one of her own.

4. Brian envied his best friend's successful acting career.

Standard dictionaries don't necessarily support the above distinction, which is why I noted that the words and concepts are often used interchangeably. But see this entry for some philosophical support for the distinction I make. I think I'm on solid ground.

Two other words that are often used interchangeably are personality and character. I tend to think of personality as superficial and external, whereas character refers to something more profound and internal. A smiling politician might have a very pleasant personality, yet be of bad character. Conversely, an army drill sergeant might have a nasty personality, yet be of sterling character. There's certainly some overlap between these two words; to call someone "nice," for example, may be to say something about that person's personality (s/he appears kind) or about his/her character (s/he actually is kind). but you can't go wrong if you think of character as deeper than personality.

Other words to think about:

stingy vs. greedy

frugal vs. stingy

injure vs. harm vs. hurt

See whether you can tease out the differences between and among the above words.


_

"Will reading old books help my vocabulary on the SAT?"

So you're stuck reading Twain's The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Melville's Moby-Dick. You find yourself wondering whether the effort will be worth it: will any of this reading pay off when it's time to take those dreaded SATs? Can reading old books help me develop my SAT vocabulary?

The short answer to this question is: probably. Why? Because many of the words used in those old books are still very much in circulation.

You have two types of lexical libraries in your head. In linguistics, these libraries are called "passive vocabulary" and "active vocabulary." Passive vocabulary is associated with listening and reading; active vocabulary, which is usually smaller, is associated with speaking and writing. Passive vocabulary develops first: as a baby, you spend about a year producing no understandable words, and during that time, your rapidly self-wiring brain is greedily absorbing all the language it hears. Even when you finally start speaking, your passive vocabulary continues to grow. Trying to get your active and passive vocabularies to be about the same level is one of the Great Quests of your life. Many people are voracious readers; this by no means guarantees they'll be competent writers.

This biological reality obtains all throughout high school: your brain is still self-wiring, believe it or not, so everything you cram into it will have some sort of influence. The authors you're reading in English class are master word-slingers; they don't write a lot of "Duhhhh..." and "Uhhhh..." dialogue. Instead, they tend to lace their prose with phrases like "a vexatious situation" and "her surreptitious glance"-- almost as if they knew that, over 150 years later, someone would be needing such vocabulary to score well on the SAT.

The best thing you can do for yourself is to be curious about the words you encounter in your reading. Look up every single word you don't know; don't simply rely on context, because context can be misleading. Make flashcards, write sentences, look the words up on Google to see how they're used by others. Do everything you can to help yourself! Don't act as if your test results are a matter of fate. They aren't. You control your destiny, which means you're responsible for how well you perform on those crucial exams.


_

the Latin word capita

The Latin word capita means "head." If you're a Spanish learner, you may know the word cabeza, "head," which comes from the Latin. Several English words and expressions come from this Latin root. Here are a few examples.

per capita: This is an expression that means "per person." How do we count people? We do a head count, right?

capital: A capital city is the head city of a country.

decapitate: Literally, to "de-head," though we might more naturally say "behead."

capitulate: This means "surrender"; I tend to think of the notion of bowing one's head in defeat, but the actual etymology refers to putting things in sections (i.e., under headings). See here.

recapitulate: We use this word when we're talking about re-covering, perhaps in summary form, the topics we've just covered in a discussion. When we recapitulate, we're "taking it again from the top," i.e., from the head.




_

more French basics: le verbe PRENDRE

The verb prendre means to take. It's an irregular verb, conjugated like this in the present tense:

Je prends
Tu prends
Il/Elle/On prend
Nous prenons
Vous prenez
Ils/Elles prennent

Some sentences:

1. Ça va prendre du temps. (That's going to take some time.)

2. Va prendre ton bain. (Go take your bath.)

3. Jacques prend le train. (Jacques is taking the train.)

4. Tu prends ton sac? (Are you taking your bag/purse/pack?)

5. Ils prennent le meilleur. (They're taking the best one.)

6. Vous prenez des photos? (Are you taking pictures?)

This is another useful irregular verb. There are plenty more.


_

the power of etymology

In a previous post, I talked about how etymology can be helpful in figuring out a word's meaning. In that post, I mentioned how often I came across that Latin root anima, which means "soul" or "mind." Here's another anima word:

equanimity

Can you figure out its meaning?

equa-/equi- = even, balanced, level, equal

anima = mind, soul

A person who evinces equanimity is "of an even mind." In plainer language-- level-headed.

Lightsaber in hand, Kenobi faced the hulking, fanged beast before him. The monster bellowed and readied itself to charge, but the Jedi was the picture of equanimity.

Or how about:

onus = burden (straight from the Latin)

onerous (same root) = burdensome

exonerate = take out from under a burden-- specifically, to remove from under the burden of guilt

Carter was exonerated when the court determined that no evidence existed to implicate him.

Make etymology work for you.


_

don't let the SAT Critical Reading sectionmake your head explode

At my day job, I often help students familiarize themselves with the SAT. Many of them dislike the Critical Reading section, which is composed of two parts: Sentence Completion and Reading Comprehension. Here's a bit of advice for how to handle each of those parts.

I. Sentence Completion

1. Know your vocabulary. You have to know what a word means if you want to understand it. You might be able to guess a word's meaning in context, but while you have time in the weeks before you test, you should think about learning the definitions of as many SAT-level words as you can. Myriad publishers have created myriad lists of the so-called "1000 words most likely to appear on the SAT." Strangely enough, every publisher seems to have a different idea as to what those 1000 words are, which means you might want to study more than one such list.

Vocabulary words are the most basic building blocks of a language. Without knowing words, you can't even think about more complex notions like grammar. Vocab is fundamental. You know what the deadliest moment on the SAT is? It's when you've got a selection of five words... and you don't know what a single one of them means.

Here-- from the College Board's website:

There is no doubt that Larry is a genuine _____ : he excels at telling stories that fascinate his listeners.

(A) braggart
(B) dilettante
(C) pilferer
(D) prevaricator
(E) raconteur

Do you know the above words? No? Then you're toast. But surely you can at least figure out that a braggart is someone who brags. Choices (B) and (E) are loan words from French; if you've studied French, you may or may not be able to figure these words out. Choice (C) is of uncertain origin, but probably French; choice (D) is derived from Latin.

The above question is ridiculously easy to answer, however, if you know these words. A braggart is someone who brags; a dilettante is a dabbler who engages in many activities, but none of them deeply; a pilferer is a thief; a prevaricator is a liar; and a raconteur is a storyteller. It should now be obvious, if it wasn't before, that (E) is the correct answer.

If you're an avid reader, take advantage of that tendency: read around. Read works that interest you, but be sure to include works that challenge you. Reading older works can be useful, too: many words on the SAT have a venerable pedigree; they've been in use for centuries. If you're not an avid reader, then you need to get reading, but try sticking with subjects that interest you. Find books about your favorite subjects that aren't written for kids. Interested in sports? There are tons of books about your favorite sport-- memoirs, books on technique, etc.-- and they'll all use SAT vocabulary at some point. Don't give up by uttering a lame, "I'm just not a reader." Well, too bad: the SAT tests reading skills. If your skills suck, don't be surprised if you end up with an execrable score.

2. Study etymologies. The two most basic etymologies to study would be Greek and Latin, but German can also be useful. I often tell my students about the Greek or Latin origins of a given word; alas, very few students actually write down what I say! But I'd recommend that you do so: print out or photocopy some etymology lists and look them over. See whether you can use those lists to help you guess at word meanings.

One root I've seen repeatedly in my tutoring sessions is anima: it's Latin for "soul" or "mind." An animal is an "ensouled" lump of matter: it's animate: because it has life, it moves. When something moves as opposed to sitting still, it's animated, like an animated cartoon or an animated keynote speaker (as opposed to a boring, lifeless keynote speaker). If you and a group of people have to vote on something, and your vote is unanimous (uni + anima), this means you've acted with one mind. A magnanimous person is generous because he or she has a great (magna) soul (anima).

Studying etymologies won't guarantee that you'll successfully decode every unfamiliar word you come across. Some roots can mean different things, so you have to be careful. Take the Latin root di-, for example: in the word dioxide, it means "two." But in the word diurnal, di- means "day," and is in fact from a totally different Latin root (dies, day). This happens sometimes: two similarly-spelled words will prove to be from two totally different roots. A harpy has nothing to do with harps, for example.

But don't let the fact that etymologies aren't a foolproof weapon discourage you: the more test-taking techniques you have at your disposal, the more likely you are to score higher on the SAT. Knowledge of etymologies is but one tool in your arsenal.

Visit Etymonline.com for more etymological information. Wikipedia also has a pretty impressive list of Greek and Latin roots. See here.

3. Understand the sentence you're reading. Here's an example straight from the College Board's website:

Although some think the terms "bug" and "insect" are _____ , the former term actually refers to _____ group of insects.

(A) parallel . . an identical
(B) precise . . an exact
(C) interchangeable . . a particular
(D) exclusive . . a separate
(E) useful . . a useless

Very quickly, you need to understand that the word Although indicates a contrast. It also helps to realize that you're probably reading a sentence from a biology textbook, or some bio-related article. Plunge into the miniature "universe" of each sentence you encounter. It's a bit like flipping channels on TV: in a fraction of a second, you can understand whether you're looking at a movie, a game show, a commercial, a drama, a comedy, the news, etc. In the same way, as you leap from sentence to sentence in the Sentence Completion section, try to grasp what each sentence is about as quickly as you can.

Since we know the sentence is hinting at some sort of contrast, it's a good guess that the two words you'll need will either be opposites or else just very different in their meanings. We can eliminate (A) right away: "parallel/identical" isn't a pair of opposites. Same for (B): "precise/exact" isn't a pair of opposites, either. (C) is a possible candidate: the word "interchangeable" implies sameness, whereas "particular" implies distinction and difference. With (D), we're back in the swamp: (D) doesn't work because "exclusive" and "separate" may actually be synonymous, or at least notionally similar, in certain contexts. Think about an exclusive party. Is that a party for the general public? Hell, no-- it's for a group of people who are separate from the mainstream. Choice (E) is interesting because it is a pair of opposites, but once you plug those words into the blanks, you see right away that "a useless group of insects" is a hilariously ridiculous phrase. Of all of our choices, (C) seems to be the best, and (C) is indeed the correct answer.

4. Classic tip: try filling in the blank(s) with your own word(s) first. This advice follows hard on the heels of what we just talked about. Once you have a good grasp on what the sentence is saying, where the writer is coming from, it's possible to make some educated guesses as to what might go in the blanks. You can use the process of elimination discussed a paragraph ago, but you can also try guessing like this:

Although some think the terms "bug" and "insect" are [similar, synonymous] , the former term actually refers to [a different/specific] group of insects.

Notice that the guesses I wrote in the blanks don't use sophisticated vocabulary. The point, here, is to get your mind into the correct notional ball park so that, when you do finally look at the answer selections, you're mentally primed to see the correct answer right away.

This method often gets you to the correct answer more quickly than does the method described in (3.) above. But the two methods are so interrelated that you may find yourself using both nearly simultaneously. That's good! It means your brain is doing some furious parallel processing to get you to the correct answer.



II. Reading Comprehension

One thing I've learned in tutoring students the Reading Comprehension section is that attitude affects comprehension. If a student has decided that he or she hates a particular reading passage, then from that moment on, it's a struggle for the student to stay focused. The advice I have to give in this section is a bit more holistic and less technique-oriented.

First, come into the SAT session well-rested and well-breakfasted. If you're tired and hungry, there's a good chance this will affect your focus. Come in awake and alert and ready for war, not sleepy and sluggish like a doomed security guard in an action movie.

Second, practice scanning the reading passages for information. Many test prep companies recommend reading through each passage first; my own advice tends to be, "Go with what works for you." If you're a fast enough reader, then go ahead and read the passages; familiarizing yourself with them that way is very effective, and your brain, which will be operating on several levels simultaneously, may form connections that become evident to your conscious mind once you turn to the reading comp questions.

One of the best scanning methods involves reading the questions first and isolating where, in the passage, you think the answers are most likely to lie. As a rule (there are exceptions, of course!), the questions follow the flow and sequence of the passage itself: the answer to the first question is likely to be located in the first part of the passage; the answers to the ensuing questions can probably be found in the middle, etc. While not as comprehensive a method as reading the entire passage through, this strategy might save you time, and might even be your preferred method if you consider yourself a slow reader.

Third, if you have access to an SAT manual with an answer key, use the answer key to your advantage: after you've checked your answers and determined which ones you've gotten wrong, look at the correct answers to those problems, then re-scan the text to determine why those answers are correct. Find, if you can, the line numbers where the evidence is located. If the question itself provides line numbers, then write yourself a brief sentence to explain why a given answer is correct: "B is correct because the passage says..."

The point of such an exercise is to help you improve your ability to scan for information. If you initially got the problem wrong, this is because you failed to find the information you needed. Now, post-test, you have the luxury of scanning the passage at a slower speed. Do so. The cognitive skill you're learning here isn't one that can be taught directly by any teacher. As you practice scanning over and over again, you'll find yourself getting better at it.

In the meantime, practice active reading in your daily life. Don't simply scroll through an article when you're online; ask yourself questions to stimulate thought. If you're reading an article about, say, the economic crisis in Europe, ask yourself whether you know who the major players are, what historical forces have contributed to the crisis, what different solutions have been proposed, and which ones seem best. Get curious! Don't let a negative attitude affect your ability to comprehend something. Approach all texts with an open, inquisitive mind. Do what you can to develop your scanning skills, and while you're at it, build your vocabulary by noting words you don't know, defining them, and writing sentences with them. Don't be afraid to Google words and see how they appear in various sentences. You can learn a lot that way.


III. Conclusion

People who do well on the SAT are those who practice this sort of global mindfulness: they're awake, alert, and curious about whatever they're reading. They care about their futures and are proactive in their attempts to master the SAT. They energetically strive to build vocabulary, understand words in context, think logically about conceptual interrelationships, and ask questions about whatever they're reading. You can do that, too. It means a lot of work, but now is the time to be doing such work.



_

this is too cool for words

Here's an article (with video) about a superhydrophobic coating. Do be sure to watch that video-- it's amazing, especially when the guy pours chocolate syrup on a treated shoe.

Imagine the stuff you could waterproof with that product! Imagine the ridiculous new rain gear you could create-- or the (temporary) kitchenware, like bowls, made out of materials that you'd normally never use as bowls!

This is also a good opportunity to learn some vocab: Superhydrophobic breaks down to the roots super (Latin super, exceeding/above the norm), hydro (Greek hydros, water), and phobia (Greek phobos, fear or dread). Something that's superhydrophobic, then, is abnormally "afraid" of water. Obviously, in science, inanimate or abiotic objects aren't described as being literally fearful; the idea, in this case, is that a hydrophobic surface will repel any water that comes in contact with it. According to the video, superhydrophobic materials don't merely resist water: they shoot water away from themselves.

(Soft contact lenses, meanwhile, are described as hydrophilic. The Greek philia means "love.")


_

spelling rant

STUDENTS! Here are three words that don't have an "a" in them:

definitely (not "definately")

independence (not "independance")

persistence (not "persistance")

Please don't make me pull my hair out. Make an effort to check your spelling. Don't do the sloppy thing and assume you're spelling correctly-- especially if you have a history of poor spelling. My own analogy for this sort of mental slovenliness is that of the litterer: a person who litters thinks to himself, "Meh... someone else'll come along and clean up my mess." And so he keeps right on littering, thereby demonstrating laziness and a lack of pride. By the same token, many people who fail to check their own spelling think to themselves, "Meh... I'll get a proofreader to look over my work. What are a few misspellings, after all?"

Don't be sloppy. Take pride in your work.

More language rants on the way.


_