to take a test unprepared

[sitifan]

I took a test unprepared yesterday, so I had to wing it.
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/wing-it-to-take-a-test-unprepared.3408079/
Is the phrase "to take a test unprepared" acceptable to native speakers?

 

[5jj]

It's OK.

 

[sitifan]

I took a test unprepared yesterday, so I had to wing it.
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/wing-it-to-take-a-test-unprepared.3408079/

Is the quoted sentence acceptable to native speakers?

 

[5jj]

Which part of my response did you not understand?

 

[sitifan]

At first, I posted my question in the quoted forum. Then a native speaker replied that the quoted sentence was not acceptable. But the whole thread was deleted by a moderator. (Reason: Do not open threads based on a post by another member.) I was wondering which part of the quoted sentence was not idiomatic.

 

[Tarheel]

I took a test unprepared yesterday, so I had to wing it.

It's an unremarkable sentence. The verb "wing it" is well known to native speakers and would not stand out in any way.

Does that answer your question?

 

[Lycidas]

I was wondering which part of the quoted sentence was not idiomatic.

I'd prefer "and" to "so" and one independent clause to two. You could also use two separate sentences.

I took a test unprepared yesterday and had to wing it.
I took a test unprepared yesterday. I had to wing it.

To have taken a test unprepared is to have been unprepared to take the test that one was taking. In that circumstance, one would already be winging it.

With "so," a different construction would be better, with the preceding context indicating the need to wing it:

I hadn't prepared for the test, so I had to wing it.

 

[5jj]

To have taken a test unprepared is to have been unprepared to take the test that one was taking. In that circumstance, one would already be winging it.

I don't agree. One does not 'wing it' until the test has actually started.

 

[Lycidas]

One does not 'wing it' until the test has actually started.

Agreed. But we are talking about a test in the past. The test started, took place, and finished; the speaker was unprepared for it and was winging it during that whole time interval. Thus, the need for the speaker to wing it was not the result of his taking the test in an unprepared state. That's why "so" doesn't work so well there.

However, if we were to transpose to a future frame of reference, in which neither the test-taking nor the winging has happened yet, we could certainly say:

If I take the test unprepared, I shall have to wing it.
I shall be taking the test unprepared, so I shall have to wing it.

 

[5jj]

Agreed. But we are talking about a test in the past. The test started, took place, and finished; the speaker was unprepared for it and was winging it during that whole time interval. Thus, the need for the speaker to wing it was not the result of his taking the test in an unprepared state. That's why "so" doesn't work so well there.

'So' is fine. The speaker had to wing it because they started the test unprepared.

 

[Lycidas]

'So' is fine. The speaker had to wing it because they started the test unprepared.

Do you perceive a difference between "The speaker started to take the test unprepared" and "The speaker took the test unprepared"?

Here's an analogous case:

I ran the race with an injured knee, so I had to wear a knee brace.

In reading that sentence, wouldn't you naturally assume that the wearing of the knee brace followed rather than coincided with the running of the race?

 

[5jj]

Do you perceive a difference between "The speaker started to take the test unprepared" and "The speaker took the test unprepared"?

Yes. The first is not particularly natural.

I ran the race with an injured knee, so I had to wear a knee brace.

In reading that sentence, wouldn't you naturally assume that the wearing of the knee brace followed rather than coincided with the running of the race?

No.

 

[Lycidas]

Yes. The first is not particularly natural.

Let me help you. The first is about the beginning of the taking of the test. The second is about the whole test-taking event.

 

[emsr2d2]

Let me help you.

There is no need to be snarky. Let's keep it friendly please.

 

[5jj]

Let me help you.

Most gracious.

The first is about the beginning of the taking of the test. The second is about the whole test-taking event.

In most situations that I can think of, a person starting a test unprepared witll finish the test unprepared - unless they give up before the end.

 

[Lycidas]

I'd be more comfortable with this variation, in which the speaker's unpreparedness, not his taking of the test, is the focus of the first independent clause:

I was unprepared when I took the test yesterday, so I had to wing it.

Compare: I had an injured knee when I ran the race, so I had to wear a knee brace.