LNAT Clarity and Precision in Writing 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A contract clause states: 'Payment shall be due within a reasonable time.' What is the primary drafting problem?
- Use of 'shall' instead of 'must' creates mandatory ambiguity.
- 'Reasonable time' is a vague standard that invites dispute over what qualifies. (Correct answer)
- The passive construction conceals who must make payment.
- The clause omits a penalty for non-payment.
Correct answer: 'Reasonable time' is a vague standard that invites dispute over what qualifies.
'Reasonable time' is an indefinite standard that parties may interpret differently; a specific date or number of days eliminates this uncertainty.
Question 2: Which of the following demonstrates effective use of parallel structure?
- The lawyer must research the law, draft the brief, and to argue the motion.
- The lawyer must research the law, draft the brief, and argue the motion. (Correct answer)
- The lawyer must research the law, the brief must be drafted, and arguing the motion.
- The lawyer researches the law, the brief is drafted, and will argue the motion.
Correct answer: The lawyer must research the law, draft the brief, and argue the motion.
Parallel structure requires all items in a series to use the same grammatical form; here, three infinitive verb phrases (research, draft, argue) are properly aligned.
Question 3: What is 'legalese,' and why do modern plain-language guidelines discourage it?
- Latin legal terms; discouraged because they are no longer legally binding.
- Technical jargon reserved for judges; discouraged in documents addressed to clients.
- Unnecessarily complex vocabulary and phrasing that reduces comprehension without adding legal precision. (Correct answer)
- Foreign-language terms; discouraged because they may not survive translation.
Correct answer: Unnecessarily complex vocabulary and phrasing that reduces comprehension without adding legal precision.
Legalese refers to opaque, archaic, or unnecessarily complex language that impedes understanding without improving legal accuracy.
Question 4: Identify the type of ambiguity in: 'Employees who submit reports late will be penalized or terminated.'
- Syntactic ambiguity — unclear whether 'or' is inclusive or exclusive. (Correct answer)
- Lexical ambiguity — 'reports' could mean written documents or verbal updates.
- Referential ambiguity — it is unclear which employees are being addressed.
- Scope ambiguity — it is unclear whether 'late' modifies 'submit' or 'will be penalized.'
Correct answer: Syntactic ambiguity — unclear whether 'or' is inclusive or exclusive.
Using 'or' leaves unclear whether employees face one of the two penalties, either penalty, or both, which is classic syntactic ambiguity.
Question 5: A writer describes an event as having occurred 'in close temporal proximity to the incident.' What is the clearest revision?
- near the time of the incident
- shortly before or after the incident (Correct answer)
- around when the incident happened
- in the general timeframe of the incident
Correct answer: shortly before or after the incident
'Shortly before or after the incident' eliminates verbose Latin-derived phrasing and specifies the direction of the temporal relationship.
Question 6: Which technique best prevents readers from misinterpreting a complex multi-part rule?
- Writing the entire rule as a single dense sentence to keep it together.
- Using numbering or lettering to separate distinct conditions and consequences. (Correct answer)
- Placing all conditions in a footnote and the rule itself in the main text.
- Replacing specific conditions with general principles to reduce length.
Correct answer: Using numbering or lettering to separate distinct conditions and consequences.
Numbered or lettered sub-provisions visually separate distinct elements of a rule, preventing readers from conflating conditions with each other.
Question 7: Which of the following sentences exemplifies the 'throat-clearing' problem in legal writing?
- The evidence supports the conclusion that the defendant acted negligently.
- It is important to note that the evidence supports the conclusion that the defendant acted negligently. (Correct answer)
- The defendant acted negligently, as the evidence demonstrates.
- Evidence of the defendant's negligence is well-established.
Correct answer: It is important to note that the evidence supports the conclusion that the defendant acted negligently.
'It is important to note that' is a throat-clearing opener that delays the actual assertion without adding information or emphasis.
LNAT Clarity and Precision in Writing 5
A contract clause states: 'Payment shall be due within a reasonable time.' What is the primary drafting problem?