Exercise 1: Why "Unwritten" Is a Genuine Misconception About the UK Constitution — Possible Solution
==========================================================================================================

The chapter's own real, verified four-source breakdown shows that
calling the UK constitution "unwritten" conflates two genuinely
different real properties: whether the constitution exists as one
single, consolidated document (it doesn't - this is what "uncodified"
correctly describes), and whether it exists in written form at all
(it largely does, contrary to the popular misconception).

Working through the chapter's own real four sources makes this
concrete. Acts of Parliament are, by definition, real written
statutes - laws passed and recorded in exactly the same written form
as any other legislation, including the real constitutional statutes
named in the chapter (the Bill of Rights 1689, the Acts of Union
1707, the Representation of the People Act 1928). Court cases are
also genuinely written - real judicial decisions, recorded and
published, that recognize and affirm constitutional principles. Works
of authority, the chapter's fourth source, are real written texts by
definition - Dicey's and Bagehot's own actual books, not oral
tradition.

Only the third source, constitutional conventions, is genuinely
unwritten in the strict sense - real, binding customs and practices
that aren't codified as formal law at all. But this is only one of
four real sources, not the whole constitution. Calling the entire UK
constitution "unwritten" because one of its four real sources happens
to be unwritten custom is the same kind of error as calling an entire
building "unfinished" because one room out of four still needs
painting - it overstates a real, partial truth into a false, sweeping
claim about the whole.

ANSWER: "Unwritten" is a genuine misconception because three of the
chapter's own real four constitutional sources - Acts of Parliament,
court cases, and works of authority - are all genuinely written down
in exactly the same sense any other law, judgment, or book is. Only
constitutional conventions are genuinely unwritten custom, making
"uncodified" (no single document) the real, accurate description,
while "unwritten" incorrectly generalizes from one of four sources to
the whole constitution.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
This works through each of the chapter's own four real sources
individually to show which are genuinely written and which aren't,
rather than simply asserting the uncodified/unwritten distinction
without demonstrating it against the actual source list.