LNAT Clarity and Precision in Writing 3 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Which of the following best describes the purpose of using 'shall' versus 'may' in statutory drafting?
- 'Shall' indicates a preference; 'may' indicates a prohibition.
- 'Shall' imposes a mandatory obligation; 'may' confers a discretionary permission. (Correct answer)
- 'Shall' is used for past actions; 'may' is used for future actions.
- Both words are interchangeable in modern legal writing.
Correct answer: 'Shall' imposes a mandatory obligation; 'may' confers a discretionary permission.
In legal drafting, 'shall' creates a binding duty while 'may' grants an option, and conflating them can fundamentally alter a provision's meaning.
Question 2: A writer uses the phrase 'in the event that' repeatedly. What is the most precise and concise substitute?
- whenever
- in case of
- if (Correct answer)
- should it occur that
Correct answer: if
'If' is the precise, direct conditional conjunction that replaces the verbose phrase 'in the event that' without loss of meaning.
Question 3: Identify the logical flaw in this argument: 'This legislation must be good because it was supported by experienced lawmakers.'
- False dichotomy
- Ad hominem
- Appeal to authority (Correct answer)
- Straw man
Correct answer: Appeal to authority
Concluding something is good merely because authorities support it is an appeal to authority fallacy, which does not address the legislation's substantive merits.
Question 4: Which sentence most clearly expresses a conditional obligation?
- The tenant might pay rent if late.
- Late rent payments could result in a penalty.
- If the tenant pays rent after the fifth of the month, a 5% penalty shall apply. (Correct answer)
- Rent paid late is generally subject to additional charges.
Correct answer: If the tenant pays rent after the fifth of the month, a 5% penalty shall apply.
This sentence specifies the exact condition, the precise consequence, and uses 'shall' to make the penalty mandatory.
Question 5: What problem arises from using the word 'said' as an adjective in legal writing, as in 'said contract'?
- It is grammatically incorrect in modern English.
- It creates ambiguity about which contract is being referenced.
- It is archaic legalese that reduces clarity without adding precision. (Correct answer)
- It implies the contract was verbal rather than written.
Correct answer: It is archaic legalese that reduces clarity without adding precision.
Words like 'said,' 'aforementioned,' and 'herein' are outdated legalese that modern plain-language drafting replaces with clear references or the noun itself.
Question 6: In which scenario is the passive voice most justified in legal writing?
- When the writer wants to avoid repetition of a subject already named.
- When the actor is unknown, unimportant, or deliberately withheld. (Correct answer)
- When writing for a general audience unfamiliar with legal terminology.
- When the sentence would otherwise be too short.
Correct answer: When the actor is unknown, unimportant, or deliberately withheld.
The passive voice is appropriately used when the agent of an action is irrelevant, unknown, or tactically omitted (e.g., 'Mistakes were made').
Question 7: Which revision of 'The board had a discussion about and made a decision on the proposal' best improves concision?
- The board discussed and considered the proposal.
- The board deliberated on and resolved the proposal matter.
- The board discussed and decided on the proposal. (Correct answer)
- The board engaged in discussion and then rendered a decision about the proposal.
Correct answer: The board discussed and decided on the proposal.
Replacing 'had a discussion about' with 'discussed' and 'made a decision on' with 'decided on' eliminates nominalization while preserving full meaning.
LNAT Clarity and Precision in Writing 3
Which of the following best describes the purpose of using 'shall' versus 'may' in statutory drafting?