The NPC Treasure Hunt was held last Saturday, and the results are available in Michael Pang's blog. A forum has since ensued, and several issues have been raised. Amongst others, there is a debate on a question where the CoC apparently accepted 2 answers found within that sector. I am bringing the discussion of Q22 to this blog, as I think it merits a detailed analysis. Perhaps my Sabahan friends who're still not familiar with Mike's blog can also take advantage and join in the debate!
OK, here is the question:
Q22) A BUSINESS ALWAYS BRIGHT, NATURALLY.
And the 2 shortlisted answers are:
(A) LITSUN MOTOR TRADING; and
(B) SUNSHINE @ ??? SDN BHD
The CoC had apparently intended (A) above as the "official answer". However, several other teams—including master teams—gave (B).
To summarise, the arguments for and against each other's case, so far, are as follows:
An advocate of the SUNSHINE answer was of the opinion that it occurs naturally, as opposed to the sun being "LIT". He (I'm assuming a he) asked, "How do you 'light' the sun?"
The advocate of the LITSUN answer, on the other hand, raised the significance of the word "business" found in the question. According to him, the answer must account for that word "business". Therefore the word SUNSHINE without, say, "Enterprise" or "Trading" etc would not be acceptable, because after all there is nothing in the word SUNSHINE, standing on its own, that has anything to do with "business".
Those are the points raised by both parties. At first glance, it would appear that both sides have equally valid points. The way I see it, both the answers are imperfect. In such a case, the only question now is to decide which one is closer to the mark?
Let's deal with the SUNSHINE first, since this was not the intended answer of the CoC.
A quick check from the dictionary will show that SUNSHINE means inter alia "the light and heat of the sun". In that sense, SUNSHINE is indeed "always bright" and it also occurs "naturally". So it seems that SUNSHINE satisfies "... always bright, naturally."
But does it satisfy "A business"? This is a bit trickier to answer. As mentioned above, one view is that "business" must necessarily refer to an extension like, say, "Enterprise" or "Trading", so that it will be known that SUNSHINE is used as a business name.
However, the thing about treasure hunt is that sometimes there is more than one ways to interpret the clue. In this particular case, in my opinion, it is also possible to construe the purpose of "A business" in the question as directing the solver to signboards of only business names. Considered from this point of view, therefore, had the word SUNSHINE been found on, say, a road sign, e.g. SUNSHINE STREET, then it shall not satisfy the question. But if SUNSHINE is used in the business context, irrespective of whether it is followed by "Enterprise" or not, then it should be acceptable. It is not perfect, I know, but still a possible way out, albeit perhaps not a universally acceptable defence.
Now we turn our attention to the intended answer, i.e. LITSUN:
Here, the extension, "Motor Trading" does satisfy the requirement of "A business" in the clue based on one possible way of interpreting the significance of "A business". But now we come to "always bright" and "naturally". And here I am having some problems. Had it been just the word SUN, then I would be very happy. After all, the SUN is indeed "always bright", and of course it occurs "naturally" too. But no, we have that word "LIT" attached to it. It is therefore necessary to investigate whether the presence of "LIT" would change the meaning of the word.
OK, here is the question:
Q22) A BUSINESS ALWAYS BRIGHT, NATURALLY.
And the 2 shortlisted answers are:
(A) LITSUN MOTOR TRADING; and
(B) SUNSHINE @ ??? SDN BHD
The CoC had apparently intended (A) above as the "official answer". However, several other teams—including master teams—gave (B).
To summarise, the arguments for and against each other's case, so far, are as follows:
An advocate of the SUNSHINE answer was of the opinion that it occurs naturally, as opposed to the sun being "LIT". He (I'm assuming a he) asked, "How do you 'light' the sun?"
The advocate of the LITSUN answer, on the other hand, raised the significance of the word "business" found in the question. According to him, the answer must account for that word "business". Therefore the word SUNSHINE without, say, "Enterprise" or "Trading" etc would not be acceptable, because after all there is nothing in the word SUNSHINE, standing on its own, that has anything to do with "business".
Those are the points raised by both parties. At first glance, it would appear that both sides have equally valid points. The way I see it, both the answers are imperfect. In such a case, the only question now is to decide which one is closer to the mark?
Let's deal with the SUNSHINE first, since this was not the intended answer of the CoC.
A quick check from the dictionary will show that SUNSHINE means inter alia "the light and heat of the sun". In that sense, SUNSHINE is indeed "always bright" and it also occurs "naturally". So it seems that SUNSHINE satisfies "... always bright, naturally."
But does it satisfy "A business"? This is a bit trickier to answer. As mentioned above, one view is that "business" must necessarily refer to an extension like, say, "Enterprise" or "Trading", so that it will be known that SUNSHINE is used as a business name.
However, the thing about treasure hunt is that sometimes there is more than one ways to interpret the clue. In this particular case, in my opinion, it is also possible to construe the purpose of "A business" in the question as directing the solver to signboards of only business names. Considered from this point of view, therefore, had the word SUNSHINE been found on, say, a road sign, e.g. SUNSHINE STREET, then it shall not satisfy the question. But if SUNSHINE is used in the business context, irrespective of whether it is followed by "Enterprise" or not, then it should be acceptable. It is not perfect, I know, but still a possible way out, albeit perhaps not a universally acceptable defence.
Now we turn our attention to the intended answer, i.e. LITSUN:
Here, the extension, "Motor Trading" does satisfy the requirement of "A business" in the clue based on one possible way of interpreting the significance of "A business". But now we come to "always bright" and "naturally". And here I am having some problems. Had it been just the word SUN, then I would be very happy. After all, the SUN is indeed "always bright", and of course it occurs "naturally" too. But no, we have that word "LIT" attached to it. It is therefore necessary to investigate whether the presence of "LIT" would change the meaning of the word.
LIT comes from the word "light", the past perfect tense is "lighted" or "lit". Unless I am totally blind to other possible meanings intended by the CoC, LIT SUN basically means "lighted sun", just like when we say "lighted candle" or "lighted cigar". If that is indeed the intention of the CoC, then I must echo the question: How do you light (up) the sun? And even if that is possible, it most certainly does not occur "naturally". And if the CoC intends to say that the sun was "naturally" lit up, I think that is also inaccurate. There is no need for "LIT". The sun is necessarily lighted for it to be a sun. Otherwise it is not a sun. But of course I am not an astrophysicist, so I might be wrong here.
To think one step further, could it be that the CoC means to say that it is the SUN that has lighted something? That is no good too. For if that's the intention, then it should have been SUNLIT (sunlighted) Something, rather than LITSUN Something. Think about it: "SUN-LIGHTED VENUE" and "LIGHTED-SUN VENUE". Which one sounds grammatically correct?
For the above reasons, had I been hunting in the NPC, I would have chosen SUNSHINE @ ??? SDN BHD.
But of course don't take it from me, because sometimes the CoC is not that detailed—they may end up accepting an inferior answer! Check out my past comments under the "Treasure Hunt" label in this blog, and you will know what I mean.
The question, standing on its own, is perfectly fine. But in view of these two possible answers, there is a need to throw in something to exclude other possibilities so that only ONE answer can be accepted. It is in that sense that I've said in Mike's blog that it is a dubious question.
7 comments:
I have since received an email from a friend who pointed out that I have not considered the "physical element of the signages".
Yes, I admit that I have not considered this aspect in the above post, but I have not forgotten that point. However, from the ongoing debate in Mike's blog, we have conflicting claims by the numerous commentators.
Some claimed that they couldn't find the SUNSHINE board even though they went back to that sector and scanned it thoroughly. Others insisted that they did see that SUNSHINE board there.
Of course I am in no position to verify the existence of the SUNSHINE board within that sector. The above discussion is, therefore, strictly based on the assumption that the SUNSHINE board is indeed found within that sector, and satisfies other hunt rules, e.g. in sequence with other answers.
Regarding the debate on the location of SUNSHINE, i.e. it was found on the wooden blind, I am also unable to verify it. But the question is whether words found on blinds qualify for answers? I think this depends entirely on the CoC. I have hunted in hunts where the CoCs accepted graffitis and banners. Other CoCs do not accept them. I suppose it's a matter of personal tastes and preferences, but I feel strongly that the CoCs should make it clear, perhaps during the breifing, which signages are excluded, if indeed he meant to limit the scope of search.
I am of the view that if the CoC is silent on those requirement, then there is nothing to limit the scope of search; hence graffitis and banners (yes, even wooden blinds) should be accepted. After all, haven't we been looking for answers in very odd places in the past? We have found answers on roadside poles, pictures within pictures, even on the ice-shaving machine which is movable. This last one is similar to the movable lorry in my opinion (I went back to take a picture of that forsaken ice-shaving machine, but it was no longer there!). But what have you, it has been done before!
Correction to your statement, "..including master teamS", its just 'A' masters team.
Frankly, a majority of us have been to enough hunts to take it hands down / a pick and run / no brainer that based on the construction of this question it is not a 'what and where' type of question, just admit it. More so in this instance the very experienced ie. well 'salted' masters team that stands staunchly by the SUNSHINE answer pointing out that it was spotted on a partially visible on a rolled up bamboo blinds? Hmm..
You have only analyse from the view point you want to see it as and hence mocking "How do you 'light' up the sun?" Have you considered in your expertise of dissecting a question on the usage of the comma in this question?
Consider this view point:
A BUSINESS - you know what the intention here is already, so lets just skip this.
ALWAYS BRIGHT - When an object is LIT (as in lighted up), is it wrong or absolutely wrong and flawed to mean its ALWAYS BRIGHT? You may want to argue that a lit candle in a big room is hence not bright, the same token as sunshine into a deep dark cave is by no means bright either, so please don't venture there.
Then there is the comma ie. ' , ' which is followed by the word 'naturally.' The significance of this little tick? It breaks the sentence and creates a different meaning with its presence. This is not required if the intention is to mean 'sunshine' as in 'always bright naturally'. Why bother with the comma to put a short pause in the sentence?
With the comma, 'naturally' come in as a part two of the answer linking to the part one ie. secondary/ confirmation clue as oppose to a straight reading of a complete sentence (as the case of arguing for the SUNSHINE answer). The SUN in this sense is an object that's naturally lighted up. Let's not even venture into astronomy as I know you are going to go back to the part of 'How do you 'light' the sun?" Oh well, just a little bit...The sun (as a star) lights up the universe but in order for it to do so doesn't it have to be 'lighted up' (lit) in the first place ie. when the star was born? Hehehe...
Cheers!
Kok Seng
Say no to pseudonyms!
HAHAHA! We've shifted our debate to this blog, huh? I'm supposed to reply some emails on the Borneo International Marathon, but I'll delay that for a bit because of this interesting debate!
OK, let's see. Oh yes, the "what and where" issue. In my opinion, answers can come in the form of "X @ Y" without the need for "what and where" in the question. As I said in Mike's blog, it is a good habit to indicate where you found your answer.
Regarding the comma, yes, I have not missed that little bugger. I paid special attention on the comma the first time I saw the question. And I wouldn't have forgiven myself if I had ignored it! I see it like this: SUNSHINE is "always bright"; and it occurs "naturally" too. Therefore, SUNSHINE is "always bright, naturally". Why won't you accept that?
On the "lighted" up sun, I am not disputing an object which has been lit up is bright. My concern is on the word sun itself. A sun is only a sun if it is already on fire. If it's not a ball of fire, it is not a sun. And if it is already on fire, how would you light it up? To me it makes no sense; how do you light up something that is already burning? That's why I said the word "SUN" is quite good enough, no need for "LIT". I can say "light up the candle", yes. I can say, "light up the charcoal", yes. But does it make sense if I said, "light up the flame"? How do you light something that is already burning?
Maybe the sun originated from a solid rock. Perhaps I am risking myself for being rediculed by Stephen Hawkings? (Is the poor chap still alive, by the way?)... hehehe. In that solid rock form, it was not called a sun. Let's say it's called SUDUMY. So we would say LIT SUDUMY to become the SUN. But not LITSUN = SUN.
If we're not careful, by the time we're done with this debate, we would become qualified astrophysicists!... HAHAHA! After all, it only takes a few days' ride into outer space to qualify as an astronaut, no?
kok seng,
you know how to point out that some people only look from one angle. Why can't you open up your eyes/mind and see it from the sunshine viewpoint? Or are your eyes too clouded from the anger you have inside you for not getting 1st placing? aiyah, once in awhile, you don't have to have the last word or have things go your way-mah. you are not always right you know (even though you may be well salted). I strongly support the CoC in accepting both the answers as both were arguably correct. Since the "swan" can be one of the answers, really, why can't the sunshine?
Simply because the Sunshine answer was a 'what and where' and does not fulfill the requirements of the question. Sigh...how many times do I have to highlight this. My point was, great that the COC in the moment of severe pressure and stress in completing the marking process plus all other things that was happening, a decision had to be made, a right call or a bad call, but it was made then and it benefited some.
My point of contention, if you could or had the ability to read between lines was, can the SUNSHINE answer be accepted in the context of the question. I am not seeking the acknowledgement of the lost 1st place. There has been too many a times that my team has been in similar or worse situation losing out on a higher finish including 1st placings over the years and we have moved on. Please don't jump to conclusions if you do not understand or appreciate what has been intended.
As I have mentioned in Mike's blog, enough with the LITSUN vs SUNSHINE, let's just move along.
PS. You may be interested to know that the unofficial results for the P44 by-elections put the favourite winning with a majority of 16,210! What am I saying, you should know since you are P44 ;P
Cheers!
Kok Seng
I don't hide behind pseudonyms!
Kok Seng, my friend, from the very beginning, when I commented in Mike's blog, I have said that both LITSUN and SUNSHINE are imperfect. It means that I have acknowledged that SUNSHINE doesn't answer the question perfectly. And I still maintain that view up to now.
Having said that, however, I am equally unhappy with LITSUN for reasons already elaborated in my above post, as well as the comments here.
I respect your views, my friend, but instead of only asking "can the SUNSHINE answer be accepted in the context of the question?", you should also ask, "can the LITSUN answer be accepted in the context of the question?".
If you are unwilling to consider the arguments against LITSUN, then how can you expect others to consider your arguments against SUNSHINE?
The process of discussion and negotiation must be a two-way street. Otherwise it is not going to get anywhere. I can live with your conclusion that "we agree to disagree" in Mike's blog. It's obviously not the best conclusion, but at least it's better than a one-way street.
As for "acknowledgement of lost 1st place position", I am equally not concerned with the results of the hunt. After all, I was not even in the hunt! My main goal here is to discuss/analyse the question and answer (s), and hopefully find possible alternative way (s) to improve the Q&A.
Oh! regarding Permatang Pauh, as expected, Anwar won handsomely.
Najib said, "...that Barisan was prepared to make necessary changes if that was what the people wanted."
Somehow that was not an original comment. I think I heard something similar during the aftermath of the General Election. Let's face it, changes will never happen.
Post a Comment