Who is Right here: Teacher or student??

D

dma_va

Registered Users (C)
Guys,

Please provide ur judgement:

In a Hindi exam for 7th Standard, there was a query:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Please give an example to expand the meaning of proverb--Daant Khattey Kar Diye" (teeth made sour)

The student's reply was: In Haldi Ghati's battle, Maharana Pratap ne Humayun ke Daant Khattey kar diye........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, the teacher didn't give any marks to the student because he said the Battle of Haldi Ghati wasn't fought b/w Humayun and Maharana Pratap. And since historically what the student wrote is incorrect, no marks will be given.

Student's argument was: Historically he may be wrong but still he conveyed the meaning of proverb.


But teacher won't have any of it.



Guys, do u think the student should get the marks or not?
 
Can you translate non-English part to English?? It seems like an interesting one.

Thanks
 
ric2,

I think u r referring to following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The student's reply was: In Haldi Ghati's battle, Maharana Pratap ne Humayun ke Daant Khattey kar diye........
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Translation:

The student's reply was: In Haldi Ghati's battle, Maharana Pratap "did sour teeth" of Humayun


Now Maharana Pratap and Humayun were leaders of two battle sides.


Hope u got it.
 
Student should get the marks

Student should get the marks. This is a test for Hindi and not for History. As per the language, it's a correct example.
 
Nope - Absolutely not!!

Originally I was going to say it is valid as a teacher is supposed to teach his/her subject not vouch for historical facts..

[if they were to do that, then no one can use fiction (scientific or otherwise) as a basis for anything..]

However in this instance the meaning of the word itself puts a context on the scenario i.e. that the two parties did meet in the mentioned contest (whether it be a battle or just a game of volleyball) and that the one who emerged victorious was indeed the victor. And remember it was the student (later on i find it is dma_va himself) who laid out the ground rules for this sentence - he started the sentence with the word Haldi Ghati. In all languages when they teach you sentence correction, the first part of the sentence lays out the ground rules and the second part of the sentence is the one that gets corrected.

Since my history is a little fuzzy, I had to get on google.com to find out that "At the battle of Haldi Ghati, near Udaipur in 1546, the Maharana waded into battle against the huge Moghul forces of Akbar" .

So i take it it was Akbar and not Humayun that was defeated. I would still say that you CANNOT use your "teeth are soured" in this scenario as it did not really happen the way you laid it out.


You could write about a fictional scenatio - like you can say in Superman-II, Superman defeats his foes (sours their teeth) in the end - now we all know supreman doesn't exist but since it is a widely seen movie you can use it as a valid sentence.

my 2 cents

P.S. I edited my message as i realized i hadn't spelled out completely what i was trying to say.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi,

I am not really understand the meaning of "teeth made sour" :(.
Hope I know more about indian culture which is really rich.

But I guess purely from the point view of logic, it seems like that the teacher is right - no mark should be offered to the student.

The teacher asks student to justify by example "if A, then B". It seems like that the student tries to justify "if B, then A".

Maybe I am wrong.
 
I think he should get marks since Humayun and Rana Pratap are the names used here not the then Kings. In our children's lessons also, most of the examples show "Ram ne isko danta" "Ram acha ladka hein", "Ram ne ghar se bhaga", "Ram o kiya ye kiya". Here they are not referring to History/nor Lord Ram I guess. People use that name for reference sake only. That's my argument.

However, its debatable. My 2c -:)
 
Student is right...

The student illustrates the phrase in a sentence and I guess the correctness of his usage is all that is required for awarding points. Regarding the factual nature of the reference, unless the teacher had stated otherwise in the exam, there is no need to provide actual events or names from history or present. At least one person here based their theory that since the battle never took place there is no context of reference. However, the person fails to realize that the student is free to choose ANY name or event for the sake of illustration without any factual basis for his reference. Consequently, although the names the student has chosen are identical to two persons in history, it is wrong to assume that the student actually based his illustrations on those two characters only. Therefore, failure to award points, to an otherwise correct answer, is objectionable and any argument supporting the teacher's action should be deemed null and void.
 
WheresMahGreen,

At that time, I wasn't mature enough to provide my arguments in the very lucid way that u did just now. But my arguments were pretty much along similar lines.

Oops!!! I accidently indicated that I was the student in this case.:D :D
 
Definately the student oops I mean dma_va you were right ;). This is making a statement like ram beat shyam at a game of chess using 2 historical names. There is nothing wrong with using historical names in a sentence unless it is meant to mislead which it is not.
I agree with someone that just said it is just a matter of context and in the context that it was used which was to give an example and not state historical facts it was accurate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If it was popular knowledge that Rana Pratap Singh defeated Humayun , then the sentence could have been accepted.
Your are trying to use a saying(or idiom?) and attempting to substantiate its meaning by using it in a sentence.
Your sentence could as well mean that Rana Pratap Singh saved Humayun.
 
if you are still interested in this

please read my earlier message. I had to edit it a little to clarify what I was trying to say
 
Re: Student should get the marks

Originally posted by Marwari
Student should get the marks. This is a test for Hindi and not for History. As per the language, it's a correct example.
Click to expand...

Not overlooking the explanations, the reasoning, the clarifications, the logic which all made sense.

I think Marwari hit the nail on the head, it was a Hindi test after all!!!!

:D :D :D

And know what I like the New and Improved ric2:D :D :D
 
This is What Approval does....Look at RIC2....Good..Bad...VERY BAd....Then suddenly approved...and Becomes GOOd Again....

Just like an Hindi Movie....


Well The Student should get the marks...OR please get the teacher to me..I will talk to him/her
 
asdasd

can we make a deal

Him = Transfered to asdasd

Her = Transfered to July16

What say???????

:D :D :D :D :D
 
Student is right ..

In giving examples, I can imagine any name and event to substitute subject and object. Some times there might be a coincidence or the sentence might be wrong but here the usage is given more important. More over, the question belongs to a litarature exam. When you talk about litarature, you need not worry about science or history. Hindi teacher has nothing to do with actual parties involved in the war. He/She should give more importance to the structure and verbal meaning. I can argue that I imagined these names and never come across them anywhere in my history books.
 
what is the context for usage of the term "teeth made sour" in hindi. Is it humiliation or defeat in battle?
Technically if the student used it in the right context, historical inaccuracy should not matter. After all it was a basttle between the maHarana and the Mughals, he was just off by a generation re one emperor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top