AWA Clarity and Precise Language 2

Question 1

Which revision best eliminates the vague pronoun reference in: 'The committee reviewed the proposal, but they rejected it because it was unclear'?

Accepted Answer

The committee reviewed the proposal but rejected it because the proposal's scope was unclear.

Answer

Replacing vague 'it' with the explicit noun 'the proposal's scope' eliminates ambiguity about what was unclear.

Question 2

In AWA writing, what does 'hedging language' refer to?

Accepted Answer

Words like 'perhaps,' 'might,' or 'could' that qualify a claim's certainty

Answer

Hedging language uses qualifiers like 'perhaps' or 'might' to acknowledge uncertainty without abandoning the argument.

Question 3

Which sentence most precisely conveys the intended meaning?

Accepted Answer

The new policy will negatively impact approximately 400 employees in the sales division.

Answer

Specific numbers and named groups ('400 employees in the sales division') replace vague quantifiers and make the claim verifiable.

Question 4

What is the primary problem with nominalizations (e.g., 'make an assumption' instead of 'assume') in analytical writing?

Accepted Answer

They make sentences longer and weaker by hiding action in nouns instead of verbs.

Answer

Nominalizations bury the action in a noun phrase, adding words and reducing directness and impact.

Question 5

Which of the following is an example of a mixed metaphor that hurts clarity?

Accepted Answer

We must iron out the wrinkles before this ship sinks.

Answer

Mixing 'iron out wrinkles' (clothing) with 'ship sinks' (nautical) creates an illogical and confusing image.

(AWA) Analytical Writing Assessment Practice Test