PELLET B Test Writing Ability: Sentence Clarity Questions and Answers 1 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Which of the following sentences is the most clearly written?
- Running for the bus, the briefcase was dropped by the officer.
- The officer dropped his briefcase running for the bus.
- While running for the bus, the officer dropped his briefcase. (Correct answer)
- The briefcase was dropped by the officer, he was running for the bus.
Correct answer: While running for the bus, the officer dropped his briefcase.
This sentence is the most clear because the introductory phrase 'While running for the bus' correctly modifies 'the officer.' The other options contain misplaced modifiers or awkward phrasing. Option A implies the briefcase was running for the bus. Option B is grammatically awkward. Option D is a run-on sentence.
Question 2: An officer is writing a report about a traffic stop. Which of the following sentences is the clearest and most appropriate for the report?
- The driver of the vehicle seemed to be kind of nervous when I spoke to him.
- I observed the driver exhibiting signs of nervousness, such as fidgeting and avoiding eye contact. (Correct answer)
- When talking to the driver, he was definitely nervous about something or other.
- The driver's nervousness was obvious to me, he wouldn't look at me and kept moving his hands around.
Correct answer: I observed the driver exhibiting signs of nervousness, such as fidgeting and avoiding eye contact.
This sentence is the most professional and clear. It uses precise, objective language ('observed,' 'exhibiting signs') and provides specific examples ('fidgeting and avoiding eye contact'). The other options use vague, subjective, or colloquial language ('kind of nervous,' 'definitely nervous about something,' 'obvious to me') which is less appropriate for a formal report.
Question 3: Identify the sentence that is grammatically correct and most clearly structured.
- The suspect was seen by the witness climbing the fence.
- Climbing the fence, the witness saw the suspect.
- The witness saw the suspect climb the fence. (Correct answer)
- The fence was climbed by the suspect, the witness saw this.
Correct answer: The witness saw the suspect climb the fence.
This sentence uses a clear subject-verb-object structure ('Witness saw suspect'). It is concise and unambiguous. Option A is in the passive voice, which can be less direct. Option B has a misplaced modifier, suggesting the witness was climbing the fence. Option D is a comma splice and is awkwardly phrased.
Question 4: Which of the following statements demonstrates the clearest writing?
- There are several pieces of evidence that were found at the scene by investigators.
- Investigators found several pieces of evidence at the scene. (Correct answer)
- At the scene, several pieces of evidence were found by the investigators who were there.
- Having arrived at the scene, the finding of several pieces of evidence was done by investigators.
Correct answer: Investigators found several pieces of evidence at the scene.
This sentence is the most clear and concise because it uses the active voice ('Investigators found'). This makes the sentence more direct and easier to understand. The other options use passive voice ('were found by') or contain unnecessary words ('who were there,' 'Having arrived'), making them less clear and more wordy.
Question 5: A field report contains the following sentence: 'The vehicle had a broken taillight, which was the reason for the stop.' How could this sentence be revised for better clarity and conciseness?
- The stop was made due to the fact that the vehicle's taillight was broken.
- I initiated a traffic stop because the vehicle had a broken taillight. (Correct answer)
- The broken taillight on the vehicle was the justification for the traffic stop that was initiated.
- The vehicle was stopped, the reason being its broken taillight.
Correct answer: I initiated a traffic stop because the vehicle had a broken taillight.
This revision is the clearest and most direct. It uses the active voice ('I initiated') and clearly states the cause-and-effect relationship. The other options are wordy and use less direct phrasing (e.g., 'due to the fact that,' 'was the justification for,' 'the reason being').
Question 6: Which of the following sentences contains a run-on or comma splice error, reducing its clarity?
- The officer interviewed the witness, and then he filed his report.
- The officer interviewed the witness then he filed his report. (Correct answer)
- After interviewing the witness, the officer filed his report.
- The officer interviewed the witness; afterward, he filed his report.
Correct answer: The officer interviewed the witness then he filed his report.
This sentence is a run-on sentence. It connects two independent clauses ('The officer interviewed the witness' and 'he filed his report') with only the word 'then,' which is not a coordinating conjunction. It requires a comma before a conjunction, a semicolon, or to be split into two sentences to be grammatically correct and clear.
PELLET B Test Writing Ability: Sentence Clarity Questions and Answers 1
Which of the following sentences is the most clearly written?