You likely know the words “concise” and “succinct,” which mean “short spoken” or merely “brief.” These clearly are opposed to “wordy.” Still, it helps to be sure regarding the other words. “Laconic” is an adjective describing someone who uses few words. Likewise, “pithy” describes something that is brief, though often implying that is a very strong and emphatic kind of brevity. “A pithy remark” is one that is short, “cutting directly to the point.”

The words “wordy” and “talkative” are clearly similar, indicating that someone speaks a lot. The word “verbose” is related to the word “verb,” which is taken from the Latin for “word.” “Verbose” is used to describe someone who uses many (often too many) words when he or she communicates. Someone is called “voluble” when he or she speaks without ceasing. In contrast to all of these, “taciturn” describes someone who does not say much in speech. The word “tacit” means “understood without being said explicitly.” A “tacit agreement” is one that is presumed without having the details “spelled out.”

Notice that all of the incorrect options indicate some state of having a lot of money or wealth. Clearly this is obvious for “wealthy” and “rich.” The word “prosperous” properly indicates success with regard to wealth and finances. “Affluence” is related to words like “fluid” and “fluent,” which indicate the idea of “flowing.” An “affluent” person is someone who is “overflowing” with money—someone who is very wealthy. In contrast to these words, “influential” people might have a lot of power to change things; however, they do not necessarily have to be wealthy to be influential (though being affluent can make it easier to be influential). Still, someone can be influential like Mother Theresa by giving the world a model for charitable activity.

At first glance, the related words likely seem to be all unrelated. What has humility to do with haughtiness? Likewise, to be "irate" is to be extremely angry, while to be "pusillanimous" is to be timid and weak-willed. Note that all of these are psychological character traits of some sort. In contrast to this group, the word “towering” might describe someone’s physical or social stature; however, it does not describe a psychological condition in the manner that the other words do.

The group of “like” terms is comprised of words that connote mere permission or allowance. Even when something is “authorized,” it is not necessarily actively promoted for use. It is merely approved—which is quite different. Likewise, to “countenance” something is to classify or accept it as possible or acceptable. To say, “I will not countenance that sort of language,” is akin to saying, “I will not accept or endorse that kind of language.” To “encourage” something, on the contrary, is to promote something in an active way. It is one thing to say, “He encouraged the telling of small lies.” It is quite another to say, “He permitted the telling of small lies.”

Notice that all of the related terms pertain to being careful or cautious. Prudent people make decisions that carefully consider the future ramifications of current actions. Someone “circumspect” is hesitant to take risks. The word literally means to look around. The “circum” comes from the Latin for around as found in “circumnavigate”—to sail around (the world). The “-spect” is derived from the Latin for to look at, which can be found in words like “spectacle” and “spectator.” The only answer choice that does not describe being careful or cautious is "heedless," which on the contrary means reckless.

All of the related words indicate some state of affairs in which two (or more) things are similar to each other but are not strictly the same. Analogous things are somewhat alike and somewhat different. Think of an analogy: “Hot is to a stove as cold is to a refrigerator.” The relationship between heat and cold and their respective appliances is the same, though in neither case is it exactly the same (as would be the case in “hot” as applied to a stove and a fire). Things that are comparable are enough alike that they can be compared to each other, but this does not mean that they are equivalent. Things that are “kindred” are alike as though they were siblings, but they are not exactly the same; therefore, the word “equivalent” is the word that does not match the others, as "equivalent" indicates an exact correspondence.

All of these words are classifications, though only the set of wrong answers are classifications for animals. You likely know “canine” and “feline,” which respectively mean pertaining to dogs and pertaining to cats. Something “bovine” pertains to cattle, and “simian” describes things pertaining to monkeys or apes. The word “draconian” describes actions that are very harsh. The word is taken from Draco, the first (and very strict) lawgiver in Athens, Greece.

The group of related words are all descriptions of kinds of sounds. Something “euphonious” is pleasant-sounding, and something “cacophonous” is a jumbled, harsh mixture of sounds.  A clamor is a loud noise—often a shouting (from the Latin for to cry out)—and something harmonious consists of sounds that are beautifully mixed. The last word certainly has metaphorical uses—e.g. “a harmonious relationship”—but still is related to the general category of “descriptions of sounds.” Only “delectable” is different from the rest. While the word is related to “delightful,” its primary usage is applied to food and drink that are delightful or delicious.

All of the related words in this question describe how something is informational or helpful with regard to knowledge. Something may be said to be illuminating not only if it produces physical light, but also if it “shines light (intellectually) on a topic." The same pertains to the word “enlightening.” Something “scholarly” is not necessarily enlightening. Indeed, merely to be scholarly means that it befits a scholar. The thing in question could merely be part of the unhelpful debates that sometimes occur among academic personalities. Likewise, something scholarly could be very difficult to understand because of its attention to obscure details, perhaps burying the main insight under a mountain of facts.