"What do you do in school?"

[Ju]

"What do you do in school?"

Which of the following answers are correct?
1. I write in school.
2. I do writing in school.

Thanks.

 

[Tdol]

I prefer the second.

 

[Ju]

I prefer the second.

Are they both grammatical?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Are they both grammatical?

Yes, but neither is natural. The "in school" is redundant. Just say "I write" or "I study."

 

[Ju]

I thought it's more polite to answer in a whole sentence, isn't it?

Could anyone help?

 

[GoesStation]

I thought it's more polite to answer in a whole sentence, isn't it?

Not really. It can sound patronizing when a native speaker responds that way, as if the person who asked the question a moment ago has already forgotten it.

 

[emsr2d2]

The question itself is rather unnatural. We might say to someone at the end of the school day "What did you do at school [today]?" The response would be something like "We did writing, we played with toys and we learnt about Australia".

"What do you do in school?" requires an answer that covers all the things the child ever does at school.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I thought it's more polite to answer in a whole sentence. Isn't it?

No.

Could anyone help?

I think that's what we've been doing.

"I write" and "I study" are full sentences.

But, in fact, questions are not always answered with full sentences. There's nothing rude about it. For example, the phrases "No, thank you" and "Yes, please," aren't sentences, but they're entirely polite.

There's no reason why repeating the words "in school" would make the answer more polite. And what could be rude about answering "I study" or "I write"?

If a question is asked, it's polite to answer it.

 

[Ju]

In the primary school workbook, it teaches that we need to repeat the part of the question when answering questions.

E.g.
A: "What will you do after school on this Saturday?"
B: "I will go to swim after school on this Saturday."

 

[GoesStation]

I guess they want to teach the children to form sentences. It's not natural usage though.

The example has several errors. Is it copied exactly from the workbook?

 

[Ju]

I guess they want to teach the children to form sentences. It's not natural usage though.

The example has several errors. Is it copied exactly from the workbook?

Sorry, I made these sentences because I didn't have the book on hand. Please correct.

Thanks.

 

[GoesStation]

In the primary school workbook, it teaches that we need to repeat the part of the question when answering questions.

E.g.
A: "What will you do after school on [STRIKE]this[/STRIKE] Saturday?"
B: "I will go [STRIKE]to[/STRIKE] swimming after school on [STRIKE]this[/STRIKE] Saturday."

I made these sentences because I didn't have the book on hand. Please correct.

The corrected question and answer above are grammatical but the answer is not natural, as discussed in previous posts.

 

[Matthew Wai]

I would simply answer 'Go swimming'.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I would simply answer 'Go swimming'.

Right. It's understood that it will be after school on Saturday.

But Goes is right, repeating the rest would be good English practice, even if it isn't really natural.

The important thing to know is that a concise answer isn't a rude answer.

 

[Tdol]

I didn't have the book on hand.

I would use to hand there.

 

[Ju]

I would use to hand there.

Can I say:
"I didn't have the book handy."

Thanks.

 

[jutfrank]

Can I say:
"I didn't have the book handy."

Yes.

 

[GoesStation]

I would use to hand there.

On hand is the natural choice in American English.

 

[Tdol]

On hand is the natural choice in American English.

I had seen it being unquestioned, so I assumed it was a variant issue and offered the British version.

 

[Matthew Wai]

I found 'at hand' at https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/at-hand