The AQA English Language Papers

Question 1
Question 2
An Exercise on Question 2 - Freedom
Weaving the quotation into the text
Exercise - A Visit From A Neighbour
Exercise - A Terrifying Journey

Both English language papers set by the AQA examination board have had the same format for a number of years and we have no reason to believe that they'll be changing it any time soon. The first four questions are based on one of the following:

For Paper 1, the first four questions are based on a single passage of fiction from a novel or short story. The fifth question is to write a story (or a story opening) based on either a picture or some written prompt.
For Paper 2, the first four questions are based on two first-hand accounts of some event, one from the 19th century and one from the 20th (or even the 21st) century. The fifth question is to write an essay expressing your opinion on a statement or a fact-based assertion.

The first four questions always follow the same basic format (with very rare variations).

Question 1

This always asks you to produce four facts from the passage, and is worth 4 marks (one per fact). This question is phrased one of two ways:

"Read lines XX to YY of the excerpt. Write down four facts from this text about ZZ."
"Read lines XX to YY of the excerpt. Which four of the following statements are true?"

There's not much that we can say about this question, other than it's worth noting the strategy in the second of these two options if you want to change your mind. You will (I assume) be sitting a paper-based exam and you select the four true statements by colouring in ovals using a pencil. The paper gives a standard set of instructions if you want to change an answer that you have coloured in, and I suggest that you become familiar with this list before sitting the exam so you don't have to waste time reading them when the clock is ticking.

Choose four statements below which are true.

Shade the circles in the boxes of the ones that you think are true.
Choose a maximum of four statements.
If you make an error cross out the whole box.
If you change your mind and require a statement that has been crossed out then draw a circle around the box.

Here's something to note about question 1. If you are asked to produce your own facts, you should try to make them independent of each other, if possible. For instance, consider this passage excerpt from a past paper:

The jungle was high and the jungle was broad. Sounds like music and flying tents filled the sky, and those were pterodactyls soaring with huge grey wings.

'I've hunted tiger, wild boar, buffalo, elephant, but now, this is it,' said Eckels. 'I'm shaking like a kid.'

'Ah,' said Travis. Everyone stopped. Travis raised his hand. 'Ahead,' he whispered, 'in the mist. There he is. There's his Royal Majesty now.' The jungle was wide and full of twitterings, rustlings, murmurs, and sighs.

1. List four things about this jungle from this part of the source.

Bad answer:

The jungle was high.
The jungle was broad.
The sky was full of sound like music.
The jungle was full of strange sounds.

Good answer:

The jungle was large in every direction.
There were strange sounds throughout the jungle.
There were pterodactyls flying in the sky.
The jungle was full of mist.

Can you tell what makes the answer on the left bad and the answer on the right good?

Question 2

This question typically takes the following format, and is always worth 8 marks:

"How does the writer use language to describe XXX?"

Here are things that you can consider when answering this question:

Language techniques. These are very powerful in getting across an impression and you should search the passage for these. There's a long list (some of which are below), and you should bear the following in mind:
- Similes ("like" or "as ... as" or similar) and metaphors (likening two things by implying one thing is the other)
- Personification - a sort of metaphor where an non-human object (inanimate or animal) is given human qualities (e.g. "the mountains glared sternly down at us").
- Alliteration and Sybillance. This is repeating letter sounds ("his feeble, fluffy failings"). Sybillance is alliteration using S sounds ("slowly, sneakily sliding away" - sounds like a snake, right?)
- Onomatopoeia (learn how to spell that!) which is a word describing a sound that actually resembles the sound it's describing e.g. murmur, buzz. For instance, the word "howl" sounds almost like a howl itself.
Does the author use adjectives and adverbs well? For instance, there is a difference between talking about "a battle" and talking about "a blood-soaked battle". The author should use at least three or four powerful adjectives or adverbs. If a particular thing is given more than about three adjectives ("a blood-soaked, fierce, long, dreary and irksome battle") then that is going a bit too far, although some of those adjectives themselves might be powerful individually.
What about sentence structure? This can be used to convey mood. For instance, when the passage describes an urgent or panicky situation, sentences could be short and punchy. When the author is trying to describe a horrific situation (such as a public hanging), then the sentences tend to be longer and involve intricate clauses (trying to wring as much disgust from the words as possible). A series of questions, one after another, might indicate confusion. Very short sentences or sentence fragments are put in to get some point across, perhaps to indicate the passing of considerable amounts of time ("He ran. And ran. And ran.") or for comic effect ("Yum yum, celery!" said nobody. Ever!)
One thing you might be able to mention (if it's appropriate) is the author's choice of what to describe and what not to. If there are two people talked about in the passage and person A is described in much more detail than person B, then the chances are that the author wants to draw our attention much more to A than to B. What the author chooses not to describe in detail might be important, as it shows which way the author wants to direct our attention. If the writer mentions a point more than once, then that's probably the main thrust of the paragraph (e.g. "You just can't understand ..." followed by "I just don't have the words ..." indicates that the writer is trying to emphasize the fact that something can't be put into words, so say so!)
One thing that authors love to do is address the reader directly, and when he/she does so, you should jump on it and point it out. This can take two forms, either a direct challenge ("Imagine, if you can...") or asking a rhetorical question ("Who could disagree with that?") These are absolute gifts to you and you should not ignore them.
You can also comment on whether any language choice that the author makes actually work. Are the similes/metaphors appropriate or just clumsy? Do the adjectives give the impression that the author intended or could they be interpreted differently?

Please note that the examiner will expect you to make inferences from the text, i.e. not just the way that the writer uses language, but what you think the writer is trying to convey:

"The writer compares the cliff to a giant striding through the sea."	A reasonable answer
"The writer compares the cliff to a giant striding through the sea in order to heighten the tension and convey the narrator's terror as he approaches it."	A good answer

I have heard from an authoratitive source that the best answers to this question should contain somewhere between 100 and 120 words, although, of course, the quality of what you write is more important than the quantity of words. The examiners are instructed to give you marks for work that they deem correct, but not to take away marks for work that isn't. This means that if you write mainly good stuff plus a few sentences of absolute rubbish, you won't lose marks because of the rubbish, you just won't gain any.

However, writing rubbish is not only time-consuming, but it can alienate the examiner. You need to keep him/her on your side. For this reason, keep the unnecessary stuff down to a minimum. Take a look at these two sentences:

The assassin is described as "moving confidently" so he must be very experienced at what he does.
The assassin is described as "moving confidently" which definitely suggests to the reader that he must be very experienced at what he does.

You would be given credit for all the words in light blue, but no credit for the words in pink. Minimise them, to save yourself time and effort.

Exercise on Question 2 - Freedom

In this extract from his autobiography, notorious conman Freddie Belcher describes his feelings on being released from a long prison sentence. Here, he is wandering round a public park on the day of his release.

I stood there, rooted to the spot, simply drinking in the heady atmosphere of the public park. All around me there were groups of children, laughing, playing, throwing balls and catching them, with their parental "guards" chatting in a relaxed manner nearby, only casting the occasional glance at their offspring. Would that I had been so free these last five years! Suddenly, I had the uncontrollable urge to join the children. I looked around for a prison officer to give me permission, before catching myself and realising that I didn't need permission. And so I ran. And ran. And ran.

By the time I stopped I was huffing and puffing and half a mile from where I had been. Exhausted, but still exhilarated. I was floating on air, intoxicated on my new-found liberty, an over-ripe fruit about to burst with euphoria. I was one of those children. All around me the flowers were nodding their heads in the breeze. Daffodils, dandelions, delphiniums, all nodding wisely in my direction. You see? What could be clearer than that? Even the flowers themselves approved of my release from that dismal hell hole.

"How does the author use language to describe his state of mind when he is in the park?"

In each case I would like you to explain a particular language point and what it tells us. You should enter no fewer than three words joining the two parts of your answer so that they form one sentence. The first one is done for you so that you can figure out what the heck I'm asking:

1.	The author uses aliteration with 'daffodils, dandelions, delphiniums' it helps the rhythm of the text and makes it feel a bit more like a poem.

Weaving the Quotation into the Sentence

Consider both these answers to the same question:

The author tells us that he had a long hard journey, which goes some way to explaining how tired he was at the end of the paragraph. We know this because he said the journey was "a seemingly never-ending climb up the winding path."
The fact that the author had to undergo "a seemingly never-ending climb up the winding path" goes some way to explaining how tired he was at the end of the paragraph.

I have made the same point in both answers, but the second one is better because it weaves the quotation into the original sentence. In the first answer, I have basically said that the journey was long and hard twice. Unnecessary, and it alienates the examiner. In this case, the trick was done by including the words of the quotation as part of the point I was making, which is a rather stylish way of making your point and quotating from the text at the same time.

I would like you to improve these answers by rephrasing them so that the quotation is woven into the point that you are making. You can change the words if you like, as long as you retain the same basic meaning.

A Visit from a Neighbour

Winston Smith lives in a dystopian society run by an extremely oppressive government, called The Party and headed by a shadowy figure named Big Brother. One day he hears a knock on his door and goes to answer it.

It was Mrs Parsons, the wife of a neighbour on the same floor. ('Mrs' was a word somewhat discountenanced by the Party - you were supposed to call everyone 'comrade' - but with some women one used it instinctively.) She was a woman of about thirty, but looking much older. One had the impression that there was dust in the creases of her face. Winston followed her down the passage. These amateur repair jobs were an almost daily irritation. Victory Mansions were old flats, built in 1930 or thereabouts, and were falling to pieces. The plaster flaked constantly from ceilings and walls, the pipes burst in every hard frost, the roof leaked whenever there was snow, the heating system was usually running at half steam when it was not closed down altogether from motives of economy. Repairs, except what you could do for yourself, had to be sanctioned by remote committees which were liable to hold up even the mending of a window-pane for two years.

'Of course it's only because Tom isn't home,' said Mrs Parsons vaguely.

The Parsons' flat was bigger than Winston's, and dingy in a different way. Everything had a battered, trampled-on look, as though the place had just been visited by some large violent animal. Games impedimenta - hockey-sticks, boxing-gloves. a burst football, a pair of sweaty shorts turned inside out - lay all over the floor, and on the table there was a litter of dirty dishes and dog-eared exercise-books. On the walls were scarlet banners of the Youth League and the Spies, and a full-sized poster of Big Brother. There was the usual boiled-cabbage smell, common to the whole building, but it was shot through by a sharper reek of sweat, which-one knew this at the first sniff, though it was hard to say how was the sweat of some person not present at the moment. In another room someone with a comb and a piece of toilet paper was trying to keep tune with the military music which was still issuing from the telescreen.

'It's the children,' said Mrs Parsons, casting a half-apprehensive glance at the door. 'They haven't been out today. And of course-'

She had a habit of breaking off her sentences in the middle. The kitchen sink was full nearly to the brim with filthy greenish water which smelt worse than ever of cabbage. Winston knelt down and examined the angle-joint of the pipe. He hated using his hands, and he hated bending down, which was always liable to start him coughing. Mrs Parsons looked on helplessly.

'Of course if Tom was home he'd put it right in a moment,' she said. 'He loves anything like that. He's ever so good with his hands, Tom is.'

Parsons was Winston's fellow-employee at the Ministry of Truth. He was a fattish but active man of paralysing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms - one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the Thought Police, the stability of the Party depended. At thirty-five he had just been unwillingly evicted from the Youth League, and before graduating into the Youth League he had managed to stay on in the Spies for a year beyond the statutory age. At the Ministry he was employed in some subordinate post for which intelligence was not required, but on the other hand he was a leading figure on the Sports Committee and all the other committees engaged in organizing community hikes, spontaneous demonstrations, savings campaigns, and voluntary activities generally. He would inform you with quiet pride, between whiffs of his pipe, that he had put in an appearance at the Community Centre every evening for the past four years. An overpowering smell of sweat, a sort of unconscious testimony to the strenuousness of his life, followed him about wherever he went, and even remained behind him after he had gone.

Which four of the following statements are true? (4 marks):

How does the author use language to illustrate the fact that Parson's apartment was dilapidated and chaotic?
The extract comes from George Orwell's novel "Nineteen Eighty-Four", a story about a society existing under a brutal, authoritarian regime. Orwell once stated that "one of my aims in writing this book was to illustrate that authoritarian governments always lead to societies that are Hell on Earth." Based on the information in the passage, to what extent, if any, do you think he has achieved this?

A Terrifying Journey

The Darien Gap is a lawless wilderness on the border of Colombia and Panama, teeming with everything from deadly snakes to antigovernment guerrillas. The region also sees a flow of migrants from Cuba, Africa, and Asia, whose desperation sends them on perilous journeys to the U.S. Jason Motlagh plunged in, risking robbery, kidnapping, and death to document one of the world's most harrowing treks.

"Huelo chilingos," the boatman shouts over the drone of an outboard motor. I smell migrants.

I turn around and see nothing but a wall of dark, unruly jungle, then I slump back into the bow of the canoe. Five days we've been out here, waiting for a group of foreigners to appear on this godforsaken smuggler's route in the Darien Gap, and all we have to show for it is sunburn and trench foot. Our search is starting to feel futile.

For centuries the lure of the unknown has attracted explorers, scientists, criminals, and other dubious characters to the Gap, a 10,000-square-mile rectangle of swamp, mountains, and rainforest that spans both sides of the border between Colombia and Panama. Plenty of things here can kill you, from venomous snakes to murderous outlaws who want your money and equipment. We've come to find the most improbable travelers imaginable: migrants who, by choice, are passing through the Dari�n region from all over the world, in a round-about bid to reach the United States and secure refugee status.

As traditional pathways to the U.S. become more difficult, Cubans, Somalis, Syrians, Bangladeshis, Nepalis, and many more have been heading to South American countries and traveling north, moving overland up the Central American isthmus. The worst part of this journey is through the Gap. The entire expanse, a roadless maze that travelers usually negotiate on foot and in boats, is dominated by narco traffickers and Cuba-backed guerrillas who've been waging war on the government of Colombia since 1964. Hundreds of migrants enter each year; many never emerge, killed or abandoned by coyotes (migrant smugglers) on ghost trails.

Our attempted trip is possible only because we're traveling with the permission of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the Marxist rebels who control access to the most direct line through the Gap-an unmarked, 50-mile, south-to-north route that's also used to move weapons and cocaine. Following months of negotiations, FARC commanders based in Havana have agreed to let us attempt the trek and visit a guerrilla camp, so long as we keep the main focus on migration, not politics. After five decades of fighting, at a cost of more than 220,000 lives on both sides, FARC and the Colombian government are in the final stages of a peace deal that would end Latin America's longest-running insurgency. No more complications are needed.

Having spent the better part of a week idle in Bijao - a ramshackle hamlet on Colombia's Cacarica River, which a group of migrants is said to be approaching - we're restless. So today we traveled three hours by boat to visit FARC rebels on an adjoining waterway. An entire morning was spent hacking through spider-infested mangrove swamps to reach their camp, only to be told that our scheduled interview is off because they don't have their uniforms with them.

Name four problems that migrants attempting to cross the Darien Gap face: (4 marks)
How does the author use language to describe the environment and society in the Darien Gap?
A reader of the passage commented that "the author clearly believes that the natural dangers present in the Darien gap are far worse than problems with rebels and military groups." To what extent, if any, do you think the passage indicates this position?