A Question of English Usage...

Here is a passage presented to us:

I thought we had finished with the subject of your wanting to become a writer when you passed through New York last April. You asked for what you called "an uncle's meddling advice," and we spent an afternoon talking about your chances of commercial or critical success (nil and next to none), about the number of readers that constitutes the American audience for literature (not enough to fill the seats at Yankee Stadium), and about the Q ratings awarded to authors by the celebrity market (equivalent to those assigned to trick dogs and retired generals). You didn't disagree with the drift of the conversation, and I thought it was understood that you would apply to business school.

The graders of the PSAT/NMSQT say that the tone of the parenthetical comments is best characterized as "wry." We in this house agree--unanimously--that "surly" is a better characterization. They are not dryly humorous with a touch of irony. They are, rather, sullenly ill-humored.

Or so we think. Do we speak the same language spoken by others, or rather our own private dialect?

Comments

[John M]

Prof:

Understanding how another person hears words (sometimes my wry is someone else's surly) is like trying to understand how a native speaker of a foreign language hears her own thoughts: pas tres facile.

That said, I still vote for "wry". There are two giveaways. One is that the uncle was asked for his "meddling" advice and a surly person would not wait to be asked. The other is that the recipient of the advice might not want the uncle to appear in a dark light and hence would only publish this little anecdote if he thought the uncle would not come off badly.

[md 20/400]

It is condescending that's for sure. I wouldn't say surly as I associate that with a speaker in an inferior social or power position. I think it could be wry, but that doesn't seem sufficient.

Ask Wolfson?

[John Quiggin]

Interpretation in this case depends on our knowledge of the writer. If he's the Dean of a Business School, "surly" is pretty clear-cut. If, as seems more likely, he's a moderately successful (in critical terms) writer himself, you could go for "wry", I guess.

[Gene O'Grady]

Surly will certainly do; I don't see wry (particularly since the one possible justification, the bit about the uncle's meddling advice, is in quotes). I'd say myself that the tone was impatient, snide, angry -- at least that's what my mother would have been if she'd used "I thought" like that twice in one paragraph.

And the sentence that summarizes the afternoon's talk seems quite badly written, like the speaker was losing control.

[paul]

It seems awfully humorless, more snide than anything. I have always understood "wry" to imply humorous intent, and I don't get any of that.

I have a hard time envisioning the facial expression that would mitigate the tone and make it seem less obnoxious. These graders speak a different, more grating, language than any of us, it seems.

[Steve Peterson]

The speaker/writer thinks they're being wry and witty, but they're neither, and just claiming that in order to cover their hostility.

[David Ross]

"Surly" implies hostility towards the person one is speaking with. I didn't get that tone here. I don't think it is "wry" either, but "wry" is closer to the mark than "surly."

[CD]

"I thought it was understood that" is in ordinary English an in-your-face thing challenge, and the emotional resonance it casts over the whole passage sucks any wryness out of it.

The bits in parentheses are sourly hyperbolic. What makes the whole passage unpleasantly overbearing is the way the writer initially opens up a little bit of ironic space, offering the possibility that this is just curmudgeonly hyperbole, and then abruptly shuts those possibilities down in the last sentence, insisting that the hyperbole be taken straight. Add to that the overall message: usually when we tell people they lack the talent for their chosen career we let them down gently.

[RSA]

Bitterly Babbittish. Well, not really, but certainly in attitude.

[rilkefan]

I don't love "wry" here given the available context ("I thought it was understood ...") - but "surly" isn't a word I think of describing a writing style, especially such a wordy one. It means to be brusque (curt) or sullen (brooding and silent), neither of which well matches "equivalent to those assigned to trick dogs and retired generals". I would consider "acerbic" a better alternative.

[randomeconstudent]

I think people are missing that surly or wry are (apparently) meant to describe only the parenthetical remarks.

To me, surly certainly seems like a better description of those than wry, though I don't like either of those and haven't ever heard surly used to describe writing. I assume they called them wry because they were "colorful" ways to illustrate the points, but there's really no humor there.

This is, though, a perfect illustration of how poorly designed these tests are. Testing reasoning skills and vocabulary (analogies, synonyms, antonyms) is a perfectly reasonable way to measure verbal ability, and conceivably should corrleate fairly well with ability to do college level writing, reading and speaking (or at least with how hard someone studied for the vocabulary that's going to be on the test, which presumably is also correlated with academic success.) Characterization of the tone of a passage (unless the answer is so obvious that no reasonable person could debate it) simply is not a reasonable thing to test in a multiple choice format, and I can't possibly think of any way in which your ability to pick a one word description from a list, with no ability to explain the choice or at least show that you know what the words mean, would be a good predictor of academic success.

[arbogast]

"Wry"? Absolutely not.

"I thought we had finished with the subject of your wanting to become a writer when you passed through New York last April."

Anger. A measure of contempt. Supercilious.

[ogmb]

Merriam-Webster defines wry as "cleverly and often ironically or grimly humorous" which works for me for the parenthetical comments ("not enough to fill the seats at Yankee Stadium"). The whole paragraph comes across as surly, but that wasn't the locus of the question.

[qertd]

I thought the whole passage was very obviously wry. First, feigned surprise: "I thought we had finished with..." Second, self-depreciation: "meddling advice..." Third, the overstated and very funny comparisons, esp. "equivalent to those assigned to trick dogs and retired generals." Fourth, the heavy presumption that one's own opinion has settled the matter: "I thought it was understood..."

The whole passage is so subtly overdone and lightly self-mocking that I can only see one way to interpret it (or the parentheticals) as surly; if you happen to actually, fervently believe that no one should pursue a career as a writer, then you would assume that the gist of the uncle's advice is utterly indisputable, and the remarks that a normal person would see as subtle humor and self-deprecation would instead come across as slightly cruel.

[BroD]

Should we assume that "wry" and "surly" were defined choices? In any case, I can see why some might interpret the condemnation of the nephew to business school as particularly surly but the parentheticals seem wry to me.

[jim]

The statements in parentheses are hyperbolic. I don't associate hyperbole with surliness. Surely the surly utter minimally. But I'm not terribly comfortable labelling them as wry, either.

[Robert the Red]

"Sour" is better than "wry".

[malcolm]

This leads to the question, what does the PSAT measure? I worked with my sons on PSAT
prep because I felt you could practice for it. If practicing can improve your scores,
then it can't measure aptitude!

[wetzel]

Multiple choice verbal reasoning questions constitute a genre with its own rules. The problem you and your son are having is that you are looking for the BEST answer. On those hard ones, when he gets stuck, tell him to choose the LEAST WORST.

'Wry' is by far the least worst of the two.

[Anon]

It is quite reasonable to imagine the entire passage delivered in a contemptuous, condescending, reproving tone of voice.

"I thought we had finished with your stupid dreams. You asked for my advice, but insulted me when you did so; I spent an afternoon talking with you about it anyway, and I THOUGHT I had convinced you to do the intelligent thing, but alas, apparently not."

Is this not a perfectly acceptable reading?

Only a great deal more context would allow one to properly determine that the uncle is not actually angry.

[loki]

I think a previous poster hit the nail on the head- look to the parentheticals.

Regarding the prospects of commercial v. critical success, the odds were "nil and next to none", implying that a work that is critically successful (i.e. 'good') will be commercially unsuccessful.

The next parenthetical implies that the number of readers of American literature (again, connoting 'good' writing) could fit in Yankee Stadium.

The final parenthetical, by equating the Q ratings of authors with trick dogs, places authors at the bottom rungs of American society.

Placed in this light, the parentheticals undercut the otherwise acerbic (not surly) tone of the overall passage. The uncle is not commenting on the nephew's ability as a writer; as the first parenthetical indicates, he may, in fact, hold that ability in esteem. Instead, this is a *wry* observation on the overall place of writers in American society, and, perhaps, an acknowledgement that the nephew will be better served going to business school in America considering the overall lack of erudition among the masses.

Just my 2 cents.

[rstone]

I think it is the fact that the parenthetical asides were already endorsed by the aspiring writer is what makes them "wry" rather than cranky/surly. Unsolicited they are unquestionably hostile, but in this context it is certainly possible that the comments are even phrases that originated with the aspiring writer rather than the uncle.

[kid bitzer]

it doesn't really matter whether 6 out of 10 readers hear "surly" hear or 7 out of 10 think "wry".

The fact is, these two descriptors are far too close to each other (and to the actual tone*) to count as good alternative answers on a multiple choice test.

It's just bad test-writing. What's culpable is not the fact that ETS said "wry" when it was actually "surly". What's culpable is that they put both "wry" and "surly" as options.

Incompetence in test-editing.

(And, yes, I did once work for ETS. Editing multiple choice tests.)

[kid bitzer]

*
(it's less of a sin to include two *wrong* answers that are indistinguishably close to each other).

[wetzel]

Also, another techniques is to step back and think about the intention of the question-writer. Why did the test-writer distinguish just the tone of the parentheticals from the tone of the whole passage? There is always a reason for that kind of specificity, and if you can see difference between the two best answers breaking across the line, that is a valuable clue. If you notice, the tone of the whole passage leans much more toward surly than just the parentheticals, so this is the clue that the test-writer is selling 'surly' to the students who didn't read the question prompt closely.

[Martin]

It obviously depends on the next sentence or two:

(a) "But, youth must be served and I will approve a modest stipend from your trust fund to allow you to ...." Wry.

(b) "You have wasted my time and your lack of candour or -- worse -- inability to decide on a course of action and stick to it ..." More like surly, in that there is an overly heavy-handed negative tone. (The review of the earlier conversation might be caracterized as faux-wry functioning as a form of sarcasm.) However, I agree with an earlier commenter that "surly" doesn't quite fit the apparent social situation of a person higher on a social scale (if only age and experience) addressing a person lower on the scale.

[Wellstone]

The difference between wry and surly lies of course, in tone, and then in intent. As the test asks, it is important to focus on the parenthetical expressions.

The attempt by the uncle to introduce "wry" as in sour, self-deprecating, weak yet charming humor into the dress-down is patent.

Surly is often used in the context of sullen reluctance, for example as in a surly waiter who is unwilling to replace a badly-cooked dish and tries instead to convince the diner with intimidation to accept it.

Wry involves an attempt at weak humor, surly is a brooding, passive-aggressive, sullen low-level frustrated anger expressed as reluctance and sloth.

[Evan Goer]

Very well said, Wellstone.

[wml]

Depends on how they grade the test. If they use factor analysis, you don't even need to know the answers! The right answer is whatever "smart" people think is the right answer, on average :p

[Bernard Yomtov]

I think John Quiggin is correct. It is important who the uncle is.

I do think the first parenthetical remark cannot be wry. It might mean, "You're a lousy writer," - surly. Or it might mean, "It's next to impossible for anyone to become a successful writer," - neither wry nor surly, but perhaps "hard-nosed."

[Emma Anne]

Just the parenthetical remarks do have some humorous overstatement to them so I would give wry the edge over surly. I am not seeing any irony though - overstatement is not irony.

[Horatio]

"Wry" is the proper word to describe the tone here. The word "surly" contains a dash of the threatening, which is not present at all here.

[Ben]

This is an excellent example of being too smart for the PSAT. I could see an actor reading this as a monologue delivering either a surly or a wry version. But those are the second-order meanings of the choices. To first order, the PSAT's model student read his vocab list the night before and remembers that "surly" kind of means "angry" and "wry" kind of means "funny". The PSAT simply will not ask him to say that jokes are surly, no matter how thinly disguised the passage's malice.

Are standardized tests stupid? Often! But they are stupid in highly predictable ways...

[billy]

>The statements in parentheses are hyperbolic.

And why is it hyperbolic? If you can answer that, then you are part of the elite, born to educated parents; and not some inner city kid.

>This is an excellent example of being too smart for the PSAT.

No, this is how bias is engineered into PSATs.

[elliottg]

I think wry is best because the question stem draws your attention to the parentheticals only. I think the number of comments about this one passage on your blog is telling as well suggesting an unhealthy interest in multiple choice tests on the part of your readers (average scores of the commentors probably hovering north of 95%). I think that your son is probably trying to distinguish his result 99.0 to the 99.9 percentile given that he is having serious discussions with his dad about wry vs. surly rather than just accepting the PSAT answer.

At this level (and maybe at any level), figuring out the "right" anser is not a score-maximizing strategy, just figure out the answer on the key.

[Jemaleddin]

Isn't that from a larger humor piece by John Hodgman on McSweeney's?

[Doctor Jay]

The paragraph has a strong "garden path" quality to it. When I began reading it, the first parenthetical "(nil and next to none)", struck me as surly. Well, I didn't think of that word, just "Man, that's harsh!" Then I read further, about the readers in America fitting into Yankee Stadium. Oops! Time to re-evaluate. Hmm, he's not talking about his nephew's talent...but still being pretty negative. Then we talk about the prestige associated with writing, trick dogs and such. Oh, really, someone is being self-deprecating.

In a sense, I'd call it bad writing, since it relies too much on tone of voice. I could totally read that to you in such a way that it would piss you off (surly), or in such a way that you would laugh and want to be a writer, in spite of the odds (wry).

As writing for the spoken word, it's pretty good, but for print, it fails. But that wasn't the point of the PSAT question, was it?

[a different chris]

Surly?? Man I must come across as a major misantrope here...

Not even close.

Please look again at this passage:

>You asked for what you called "an uncle's meddling advice,"

This is a beautiful return of a teasing forehand. You don't ask somebody about anything important if you think he's just a "meddler". He/She wanted the uncle's opinion, but couldn't help but tease him a bit to defuse some of the seriousness of being called into a life-altering decision point.

And the uncle smilingly flung it back knowing it was presented in good humor.

This is a guy who, as parents never can be, gets to be a friend as well as an older counsel to a beloved family member.

Yes I was very fond of my uncle, even though you didn't ask. And I would have been more than likely to preface any discussion with a insolent little shot because we would both enjoy the surgical deflation of my pretend ego.

And yeah, once a man my dad and I acted the same way.

[dubblblind]

Brad, did you really stop at the first definition of wry, "dryly humorous with a touch of irony", in forming your opinion?

How about "disdainfully or ironically humorous; scornful and mocking" as the definition of wry they were thinking of?

Wry is a correct answer.

[PQuincy]

I just want to know why anyone would want to "become a writer when [passing] through New York in April." That's an awfully short time frame for such a large ambition, isn't it?

[John]

Why April? Well, April is the cruelest month.

Wry, witty, or sour, does anybody seriously disagree with the Dutch uncle in the passage?

Think about it. All the serious readers in the US wouldn't fill Yankee Stadium. Hockey might. In the rest of the world soccer would. But serious readers?

[The Black Monk]

I think wry is the right answer.

To me, a comment isn't surly unless you know it's intentionally mean-spirited. Wry can be biting but isn't supposed to be mean. Surly comments are aimed at causing pain; Surly is meant to be mean. This is my general feeling for the usage.

In this particular case, it's only your interpretation that makes the comments surely. There is no textual indication of mean-spirited intent.

Adler said that we should read everything like we read a letter from a crush - painfully aware of the ambiguities and equivocations - there's a 100 different ways to interpret any given line and exponentially more ways to interpret the whole page.

That's particularly good advice on the PSAT. The test makers want to find kids who are aware of the difference between what's on the page and what's in their head. It helps them separate out who will be able to learn from the text book and who will actually need a live, teaching professor.

The point of the PSAT is not to test kids knowledge of specific vocabulary or math skills. Rather, it's to identify for colleges which students are most likely to suceed without the help of professors. The question they answer is "which students (post-graduation) would give this college the biggest reputation bang for it's teaching buck?"

So...ya...Wry is the right answer. No scholarship for you...

[wetzel]

Here's a question for the group. Which periodical subscriptions would you recommend for high school and college students that would give them the best mental work for improving verbal reasoning and reading comprehension? I think the average essay should be in the 500 to 1000 word range, and there should be a wide variety of subject matter. I think the NY Review of Books would be pretty good. Any ideas?

[LizardBreath]

I have a generally good ear for what the ETS wants from a question, and I'd have picked 'wry' over 'surly' for this one. You're right that 'wry' is off, but 'surly', in the unsubtle context of a multiple choice question, implies to me 'hostility from an uneducated speaker, including the potential of escalation to violence'. The fact that the passage attempts cleverness makes it ineligible for surliness, leaving 'wry' as the closer available option.

But the question does just stink.

[Kenneth Almquist]

"In a sense, I'd call it bad writing, since it relies too much on tone of voice."

The passage is clearly an excerpt from a larger work. It looks to me like the work of a skilled writer, so I'd guess that the tone of voice would be clear if you read the entire work.

For the record, the parenthetical comments struck me as wry rather than surly.

[wkwillis]

New Yorkers and Californians have a different idea of the meaning of "wry" and "surly".

[piotr]

As a non-native speaker, I got impression that both "surly" and "wry" have very restricted applicability. "Surly" would refer to "help", "French waiter" etc. while uncle would be "wry" just because he is an uncle.

Apparently, test writers were operating under the same set of assumptions.

[neel]

So many of those who get 800 on the GRE verbal cannot in fact speak English. My own scores fell in the 620 - 720 range on the multiple pratice tests I took and it is mostly because I would get stuck on points such as "wry" or "surly". I suggest that if you really want to know the correct answer ask one of these Chinese students with the stellar scores. Berkeley, I am sure, is full of them.

Test scores are something I have very little respect for.

[Dano]

The parentheticals to me are neither wry nor surly. They are closer to wry and I like the quality for the PSAT level.

Sour isn't quite right either. Think of the age of the author and their attempt at appearing worldly and clever.

Best,

D

[joeo]

Standardized tests have a well known anti-neel bias.

[stewart]

The humour is a bit too faint and lacking self-deprecation to strike me as wry. I'd go for 'curmudgeonly' myself. And what's a Q rating?

[Lex]

If this came from the PSAT, weren't there two other possible answers? :-)

[MDtoMN]

I would say "bitter".