ACT English : Avoiding Ambiguity and Redundancy
Study concepts, example questions & explanations for ACT English
All ACT English Resources
Example Questions
Example Question #242 : Revising Content
Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the sentence. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose “NO CHANGE.”
My friend Maria immigrated to the US when she was five. The first thing she ate after getting off the plane was a hamburger; Maria tells me she still remembers that hamburger: how it smelled, the waxy paper it was wrapped in, the way the condiments dripped into her napkin, and another part of her memory is the hamburger's smoky, delicious taste.
the hamburger's smoky, delicious taste.
tasting the smoky and delicious hamburger in her memory.
a remembrance of the hamburger's smoky, delicious taste.
NO CHANGE
the hamburger's smoky, delicious taste.
As it is written, the underlined part of this sentence contains some redundant information. The underlined part doesn't need to repeat the fact that “the hamburger's smoky, delicious taste” is part of Maria's memory; that information is already given by the beginning part of the sentence that introduces the list of what Maria remembers. The most concise way to rephrase the underlined part, and the best way to create parallel structure among all the items in the list, is simply to say “the hamburger's smoky, delicious taste.”
Example Question #31 : Avoiding Ambiguity And Redundancy
Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the sentence. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose “NO CHANGE.”
Cacti show that life can not only survive in the desert, but they show that life can even flourish there.
even flourish there.
even there, in the desert, life can flourish.
life can even flourish in the desert.
NO CHANGE
even flourish there.
This sentence uses the structure of “not only X, but also/even Y”. According to the sentence, cacti show that life can not only “survive” but also “flourish”. As it is written, the underlined part of the sentence contains some redundant elements. It doesn't need to repeat the words “they show that life can”, since we already know that the sentence is talking about cacti and what cacti show about life. So, the most concise way to rewrite the underlined part is simply to say, “even flourish there.”
Example Question #244 : Revising Content
There once was a shepherd boy whom sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. He was hot and exhausted fanning himself, rapidly in a feeble attempt to cool himself down. On top of that, he had never been so bored before.
To amuse himself, he decided to play a joke. He put his hands around his mouth and yelled in a loud voice, "Wolf! Wolf! A wolf is chasing the sheep!”
They came running. They asked the boy, “What’s going on? Did you yell ‘A wolf is chasing the sheep?’ ”
The boy laughed. “It was just a joke, everyone.”
The people fumed, but they all returned to their homes.
The next day, the boy bored again decided to amuse himself again. He bellowed, “Wolf! Wolf!”
Again, the townspeople came running. Once they arrived and witnessed the laughing boy, they realized they’d been tricked a second time. Nonetheless, they returned home and irritated resolved to never fall for the trick again for third time.
The next day, the boy was watching his sheep. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a wolf appeared from behind the bushes. With its teeth bared, the boy cowered as the wolf approached the sheep. Terrified, he called, “Help! A wolf! A wolf is here!”
The people ignored his cries. “That mischievous boy,” they all said to one another. “He must think he can fool us again.” But not one of them came running.
No one was there to witness as the wolf ate every last sheep on the hillside, as the boy helplessly cowered behind a bush. As the boy hid, he shook his head. “I shall never fib again,” he resolved to himself.
Which of the following is the best alternative to the underlined phrase, "yelled in a loud voice"?
yelled loudly
yelled, in a loud voice
yelled in a loud manner
yelled
NO CHANGE
yelled
The word "yelled" implies that the boy was doing so loudly. Therefore, the addition of "in a loud voice" is redundant. The same is true of saying "yelled in a loud manner" and "yelled loudly." The phrase can just be left as "yelled."
Example Question #245 : Revising Content
There once was a shepherd boy whom sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. He was hot and exhausted fanning himself, rapidly in a feeble attempt to cool himself down. On top of that, he had never been so bored before.
To amuse himself, he decided to play a joke. He put his hands around his mouth and yelled in a loud voice, "Wolf! Wolf! A wolf is chasing the sheep!”
They came running. They asked the boy, “What’s going on? Did you yell ‘A wolf is chasing the sheep?’ ”
The boy laughed. “It was just a joke, everyone.”
The people fumed, but they all returned to their homes.
The next day, the boy bored again decided to amuse himself again. He bellowed, “Wolf! Wolf!”
Again, the townspeople came running. Once they arrived and witnessed the laughing boy, they realized they’d been tricked a second time. Nonetheless, they returned home and irritated resolved to never fall for the trick again for third time.
The next day, the boy was watching his sheep. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a wolf appeared from behind the bushes. With its teeth bared, the boy cowered as the wolf approached the sheep. Terrified, he called, “Help! A wolf! A wolf is here!”
The people ignored his cries. “That mischievous boy,” they all said to one another. “He must think he can fool us again.” But not one of them came running.
No one was there to witness as the wolf ate every last sheep on the hillside, as the boy helplessly cowered behind a bush. As the boy hid, he shook his head. “I shall never fib again,” he resolved to himself.
What is the best alternative for the underlined sentence, "They came running"?
NO CHANGE
They came, running.
They all came running.
The townspeople came running.
He or she came running.
The townspeople came running.
The phrase "they" is ambiguous. The replacement of "they" with "the townspeople" clarifies who the pronoun refers to. "They all" does not fix the problem of ambiguity, "he or she" is illogical in this sentence, and the addition of a comma is unnecessary. "The townspeople came running" is the best answer.
Example Question #246 : Revising Content
There once was a shepherd boy whom sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. He was hot and exhausted fanning himself, rapidly in a feeble attempt to cool himself down. On top of that, he had never been so bored before.
To amuse himself, he decided to play a joke. He put his hands around his mouth and yelled in a loud voice, "Wolf! Wolf! A wolf is chasing the sheep!”
They came running. They asked the boy, “What’s going on? Did you yell ‘A wolf is chasing the sheep?’ ”
The boy laughed. “It was just a joke, everyone.”
The people fumed, but they all returned to their homes.
The next day, the boy bored again decided to amuse himself again. He bellowed, “Wolf! Wolf!”
Again, the townspeople came running. Once they arrived and witnessed the laughing boy, they realized they’d been tricked a second time. Nonetheless, they returned home and irritated resolved to never fall for the trick again for third time.
The next day, the boy was watching his sheep. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a wolf appeared from behind the bushes. With its teeth bared, the boy cowered as the wolf approached the sheep. Terrified, he called, “Help! A wolf! A wolf is here!”
The people ignored his cries. “That mischievous boy,” they all said to one another. “He must think he can fool us again.” But not one of them came running.
No one was there to witness as the wolf ate every last sheep on the hillside, as the boy helplessly cowered behind a bush. As the boy hid, he shook his head. “I shall never fib again,” he resolved to himself.
Which of the following is the best alternative for the underlined phrase, "Suddenly, out of nowhere"?
Suddenly! Out of nowhere!
Out of nowhere, suddenly
Suddenly
Suddenly out of nowhere
NO CHANGE
Suddenly
The phrase is redundant. The definition of "suddenly" is "quickly and unexpectedly," which is nearly the same meaning as stating "out of nowhere." Therefore, adding the phrase "out of nowhere" is needlessly wordy. "Suddenly" is the best replacement, as the other choices don't fix the issue of redundancy.
Example Question #247 : Revising Content
There once was a shepherd boy whom sat on the hillside watching the village sheep. He was hot and exhausted fanning himself, rapidly in a feeble attempt to cool himself down. On top of that, he had never been so bored before.
To amuse himself, he decided to play a joke. He put his hands around his mouth and yelled in a loud voice, "Wolf! Wolf! A wolf is chasing the sheep!”
They came running. They asked the boy, “What’s going on? Did you yell ‘A wolf is chasing the sheep?’ ”
The boy laughed. “It was just a joke, everyone.”
The people fumed, but they all returned to their homes.
The next day, the boy bored again decided to amuse himself again. He bellowed, “Wolf! Wolf!”
Again, the townspeople came running. Once they arrived and witnessed the laughing boy, they realized they’d been tricked a second time. Nonetheless, they returned home and irritated resolved to never fall for the trick again for third time.
The next day, the boy was watching his sheep. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a wolf appeared from behind the bushes. With its teeth bared, the boy cowered as the wolf approached the sheep. Terrified, he called, “Help! A wolf! A wolf is here!”
The people ignored his cries. “That mischievous boy,” they all said to one another. “He must think he can fool us again.” But not one of them came running.
No one was there to witness as the wolf ate every last sheep on the hillside, as the boy helplessly cowered behind a bush. As the boy hid, he shook his head. “I shall never fib again,” he resolved to himself.
Which of the following is the best alternative for the underline portion: "for third time"?
NO CHANGE
thrice
for a third time
for another time, making it a third
Delete the underlined portion
Delete the underlined portion
Mentioning that the townspeople didn't want to fall for the trick a third time is redundant. Saying they didn't want to fall for the trick "again" already implies it would be the third time, as a first and second time have already occurred. Stating this is obvious, unnecessary for the story, and is needlessly wordy.
Example Question #248 : Revising Content
Many people believe that the current admissions process for colleges is detrimental for high school students. They claim that current admissions standards place a lot of emphasis on things that do not actually measure a child's success in college, such as standardized test scores. They also believe, that there is an augmented attitude among youth of insincerity, as they do community service just or pretend to be interested in activities solely for admissions.
On the other hand, some believe that there is nothing wrong with the admissions process: any insincerity is a result of active choices on the part of the student, as well as an increase in competition for colleges resulting from economic and social trends. Also, they believe that colleges are in the right for looking for active, rounded students involving in their school and community, and they perceive that there is nothing wrong in encouraging students to have more involvement.
Which of the following is the best alternative for the bolded word, "things"?
numerous irrelevant measures of admission
various things
factors
NO CHANGE
thing's
factors
The word "things" is vague and ambiguous. The option, "various things," does not solve that issue and adds unnecessary wordiness. The phrase "numerous irrelevant measures of admission" is unnecessarily wordy and redundant. The option, "thing's," is incorrect, as it shows a possessive form of the word "thing," which is inappropriate in this context. "Factors" is the best answer: it is specific and concise.
Example Question #31 : Avoiding Ambiguity And Redundancy
Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the sentence. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
With almost three times as many recorded incidents, the number of diagnosed cases of dengue fever has tripled in Brazil since 1984.
With almost three times as many diagnosed cases of dengue fever has tripled in Brazil since 1984.
With almost three times as many recorded incidents of dengue fever, the number has tripled in Brazil since 1984.
With almost three times as many, the number of diagnosed cases of dengue fever has tripled in Brazil since 1984.
Since 1984, the number of diagnosed cases of dengue fever has tripled in Brazil.
NO CHANGE
Since 1984, the number of diagnosed cases of dengue fever has tripled in Brazil.
The issue here is redundancy. "Three times as many" communicates almost exactly what "has tripled" communicates about the number of cases or incidents. The use of the preposition since, requires the present perfect tense, describing an action initiated in the past and still active at the present time. The correct answer eliminates the redundancy and reorganizes the sentence in the most efficient manner.
Example Question #250 : Revising Content
The following is an excerpt from Under The Lilacs (1878) by Louisa May Alcott
"Don't they look sweet?" cried Bab, gazing with maternal pride upon the left-hand row of dolls, who might appropriately have sung in chorus, "We are seven."
"Very nice; but my Belinda beats them all. I do think she is the splendidest child that ever was!" And Betty set down the basket to run and embrace the suspended darling, just then kicking up her heels with joyful abandon.
"The cake can be cooling while we fix the children. The cake does smell perfectly delicious!" said Bab, lifting the napkin to hang over the basket, fondly regarding the little round loaf that lay inside.
"Leave some smell for me!" commanded Betty, running back to get her fair share of the spicy fragrance. The pug noses sniffed it up luxuriously, and the bright eyes feasted upon the loveliness of the cake, so brown and shiny, with a tipsy-looking B in pie-crust staggering down one side, instead of sitting properly a-top.
"Ma let me put it on the very last minute, and it baked so hard I couldn't pick it off. We can give Belinda that piece, so it's just as well," observed Betty, taking the lead, as her child was queen of the revel.
Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the passage. If the bolded and underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
He does
NO CHANGE
It do
It does
They do
It does
As it is written, the underlined phrase is redundant. "It does" is the correct answer. This is because "it" is the appropriate pronoun to replace "the cake" (a singular, genderless noun) and the verb "does" is in agreement with "it."
Example Question #251 : Revising Content
Choose the answer that best corrects the underlined portion of the sentence. If the underlined portion is correct as written, choose "NO CHANGE."
Because drought conditions force them into populated areas is the reason there have been so many sightings of coyotes in my neighborhood this year.
Drought conditions being why they have been forced into populated areas
Because of their being forced by drought conditions into populated areas
They have been forced by drought conditions into populated areas and this
NO CHANGE
Drought conditions that have forced them into populated areas
Drought conditions that have forced them into populated areas
The words "because" and "why" both have the same meaning as the phrase "the reason" and thus cause redundancy. The verb "being" used without a preceding auxiliary verb creates an awkward sentence structure in two of the answer choices.
All ACT English Resources
