Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Explanations:
Reporting questions:
* We can report questions with verbs like ask, wonder and want to know.
Where do you live? he asked.
He asked me where I lived.
(NOT where I did live)
Do you live in Athens? he asked.
He wanted to know if I lived in Athens. (NOT if I did live)
* Look at more examples of Wh- questions (using when, what, why, how etc). Study the
tense changes and word order carefully. Notice that the word order in a reported question
is like a normal statement, with the subject before the verb.
Where is the bus station? she asked.
She asked where the bus station was.
(NOT where was the bus station)
What are you doing? he asked.
He wanted to know what I was doing.
Why did you go there? she asked.
She wondered why I had gone there.
Where have you come from? he asked.
He asked me where I had come from.
* Look at more examples of Yes/No questions (Do you, Did you, Are you etc). When we
report Yes/No questions we use if or whether.
Does the London train stop here? she asked.
She asked me if the London train stopped here.
Did you speak to Rachel? he asked.
He wanted to know whether I had spoken to Rachel.
Are you a student? she asked.
She asked me if I was a student.
Reporting commands and requests
* Commands are reported with tell and the infinitive.
Wait! Wait!
I told him to wait.
* Requests are reported with ask and the infinitive.
Please wait!
I asked her to wait.
Apologize for
Ask
Congratulate on
Decide
Deny
Invite
Offer
Promise
Refuse
Remind
Suggest
* Reporting verbs can have one or more different patterns. A good dictionary
shows this information.
Verb + to infinitive:
Verb+ object + to infinitive
Verb+ -ing form:
Verb+ preposition + -ing
Practice
1. Put one suitable word in each space.
a) Fiona asked me whether I was going to school or not.
b) David asked his mother . she . be coming home.
appologized
refused
congratulated invited
suggested
offered
these critics say, its partly because social scientists helped create the false impression
that three-quarters of whites are unconsciously biased against blacks.
The I.A.T., which has been taken by millions of people on an academic Web site,
measures respondents reaction times as they follow instructions to associate words like
joy or awful with either blacks or whites. It generally takes whites longer to associate
positive words with blacks than with whites, although some do show no bias. (To meet
one of these exceptional cases, go to TierneyLab, at nytimes.com/tierneylab.)
The test is widely used in research, and some critics acknowledge that its a useful
tool for detecting unconscious attitudes and studying cognitive processes. But they say
its misleading for I.A.T. researchers to give individuals ratings like slight, moderate
or strong and advice on dealing with their bias when there isnt even that much
consistency in the same persons scores if the test is taken again.
One can decrease racial bias scores on the I.A.T. by simply exposing people to
pictures of African-Americans enjoying a picnic, says Hart Blanton, a psychologist at
Texas A&M. Yet respondents who take this test on the Web are given feedback
suggesting that some enduring* quality is being assessed*. He says that even the scoring
system itself has been changed arbitrarily in recent years. People receiving feedback
about their strong racial biases, Dr. Blanton says, are encouraged in sensitivity*
workshops to confront these tendencies as some ugly reality that has meaning in their
daily lives. But unbeknownst* to respondents who take this test, the labels* given to them
were chosen by a small group of people who simply looked at a distribution* of test
scores and decided what terms seemed about right. This is not how science is done.
Two of the leading I.A.T. researchers, Anthony Greenwald of the University of
Washington and Mahzarin Banaji of Harvard, say that some of the past criticism about
their measurement techniques has been useful. But they dismiss most of the current
objections as moot* because the I.A.T.s validity has been confirmed repeatedly.
In a new a meta-analysis of more than 100 studies, Dr. Greenwald, Dr. Banaji and
fellow psychologists conclude that scores on I.A.T. reliably* predict peoples behavior
and attitudes, and that the test is a better predictor of interracial behavior than selfdescription. Their critics reach a different conclusion after reanalyzing the data in some
of those studies, which they say are inconsistent and sometimes demonstrate the reverse
of what has been reported. They have suggested addressing the scientific dispute over
bias and the researchers arguments about the legal implications for affirmative-action
policies by having the two sides join in an adversarial collaboration.
One critic, Philip Tetlock, a psychologist at the University of California,
Berkeley, said he had found prominent research groups and scholars willing to mediate
joint experiments. But so far nothing has happened and each side blames the other. Dr.
Greenwald says he tried proposing a joint experiment to Dr. Tetlock only to have it
rejected. Dr. Tetlock says that he tried a counterproposal and offered to work out a
compromise, but that the I.A.T. researchers had refused two invitations to sit down with
independent mediators.
After all the mutual invective in the I.A.T. debate, maybe its unrealistic to expect
the two sides to collaborate. But these social scientists are supposed to be experts in
overcoming bias and promoting social harmony. If they cant figure out how to get along
with their own colleagues, how seriously should we take their advice for everyone else?