Home

Tutoring

Subjects

Live Classes

Study Coach

Essay Review

On-Demand Courses

Colleges

Games

Opening subject page...

Loading your content

ACT English

ACT English Help: Clarity And Concision

Review real example questions for Clarity And Concision in ACT English.

Question 1

Jessica decided to rearrange her living room furniture. She moved the couch closer to the television in order to enhance the viewing experience.

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. so that it enhances the viewing experience
  3. to make the viewing experience better
  4. to enhance the viewing experience
Explanation: This question tests your ability to identify and eliminate wordy, redundant phrases. The underlined phrase 'in order to enhance the viewing experience' contains the unnecessarily wordy construction 'in order to,' which can be simplified to just 'to.' Choice D eliminates this wordiness while maintaining the same meaning. Choices B and C use different phrasing but are wordier than necessary. When you see phrases like 'in order to,' check if the simpler 'to' works equally well.

Question 2

PASSAGE IV: Monopoly’s Stolen Origins

¹ Almost everyone has played a game of Monopoly. With its iconic top hat playing piece, colorful paper money, and "Go to Jail" square, it is arguably the most famous board game in the world. According to popular corporate lore, the game was invented in 1933 by Charles Darrow, an unemployed heating engineer (31) who dreamed up the real estate trading game in his basement during the Great Depression. However, the true history of Monopoly is much more complicated, and it begins three decades earlier with a woman named Lizzie Magie.

² In 1903, Magie designed a board game she called The Landlord's Game. She was a progressive thinker and a follower of Henry George, an economist who believed that land should belong to everyone and that landlords unjustly profited from the labor of others. Magie created the game as an educational tool (32) to illustrate the negative consequences of land monopolies. (33) The board featured a continuous track around the outside, properties that could be bought, and a corner space that sent players to jail.

³ Magie’s game was unique because it featured two sets of rules. Under the "Prosperity" rules, every player gained money when a property was acquired, reflecting the idea of shared wealth. Under the "Monopolist" rules, the goal was to acquire all the land and bankrupt the other players. Magie hoped that players would experience both versions and (34) have recognized the superiority of the cooperative approach.

⁴ Instead, players found the cutthroat "Monopolist" version to be far more thrilling. Over the next thirty years, the game spread organically through word of mouth. College students, Quakers, and intellectuals made their own handcrafted boards, modifying the rules and adding local street names. (35) One of these localized versions eventually found its way to Charles Darrow.

⁵ Darrow played the game, loved it, and asked his host for a written copy of the rules. He then made his own version, claiming the invention as his own, and sold it to Parker Brothers in 1935. It became an instant sensation, (36) making Darrow a millionaire. When Parker Brothers discovered that Darrow had not actually invented the game, they quietly bought the patent for The Landlord's Game from Lizzie Magie for a mere $500. (37) Magie never received any royalties from the millions of Monopoly games sold worldwide.

⁶ For decades, Magie’s contribution was completely erased from history. It wasn't until a (38) high-profile legal battle in the 1970s that the true origins of the game were brought to light. Today, Lizzie Magie is finally being recognized as the brilliant, progressive inventor behind the world’s favorite capitalist pastime. (39) Its a profound irony that a game designed to critique the concentration of wealth was ultimately used to make a few men very, very rich. (40)

Which of the answer choices below makes the sentence most grammatically acceptable?

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. making Darrow a millionaire!
  3. rendering Darrow into a very wealthy millionaire.
  4. causing Darrow to be a millionaire in terms of money.
Explanation: The correct answer is A (NO CHANGE — making Darrow a millionaire). F is clean, concise, and tonally appropriate — the participial phrase 'making Darrow a millionaire' efficiently conveys the financial outcome without excess or distortion. G adds an exclamation point, which is inappropriate for the passage's measured, journalistic tone — the essay is a critical historical narrative about injustice, not a celebration of Darrow's wealth. Exclamation points are almost always wrong on the ACT unless the passage is clearly informal or celebratory. H ('rendering Darrow into a very wealthy millionaire') is redundant on two levels: 'millionaire' already implies wealth, making 'very wealthy' unnecessary; and 'rendering into' is an awkward idiom — we 'make' or 'render' someone something, not 'render into.' J ('causing Darrow to be a millionaire in terms of money') is severely redundant — 'a millionaire' is by definition defined in terms of money, making the appended phrase completely pointless. On conciseness questions, the ACT rewards precision and economy of language. Any answer that adds words without adding meaning is wrong. Pro tip: if two answer choices convey the same information, the shorter one is almost always correct.

Question 3

For a history project, Maya interviewed her grandfather about the small grocery store he ran in the 1970s. He described writing prices by hand, greeting regular customers by name, and stocking produce from nearby farms. Maya wants her report to sound straightforward and professional, so she revises one sentence for concision. Which choice is the clearest and most concise?

In her draft, Maya wrote that her grandfather “kept careful records of sales and expenses,” and she noted that he often frequently stayed late to balance the ledger.

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. often
  3. on many occasions frequently
  4. DELETE the underlined portion.
Explanation: This question assesses concision by identifying redundant adverbs that convey the same meaning. The underlined 'often frequently' is repetitive since both words mean occurring many times, so combining them adds unnecessary length. Choice B, 'often,' is the clearest and most concise, preserving the intended frequency without duplication. Choice C expands the redundancy with 'on many occasions frequently,' and D removes the adverb entirely, which could alter the emphasis on regularity. Choice A retains the original wordiness. When you see paired synonyms in concision questions, choose the single word that captures the essence to keep writing straightforward.

Question 4

The weather forecast predicted rainy weather conditions for the weekend.

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. rainy conditions
  3. rain
  4. conditions of rain
Explanation: This question focuses on eliminating redundant descriptive phrases. The phrase 'rainy weather conditions' is redundant because 'rain' already describes a weather condition. Choice C provides the most concise expression. Choice B maintains some redundancy, and choice D is unnecessarily complex. When you encounter descriptive phrases, check whether the main term already encompasses the descriptive category.

Question 5

The students were asked to write an essay at this point in time on the novel they just finished reading.

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. at this time
  3. now
  4. currently
Explanation: This question tests elimination of unnecessarily complex temporal phrases. The phrase 'at this point in time' is a wordy way to express 'now.' Choice C provides the most concise option. Choices B and D offer middle-ground solutions but aren't as efficient as 'now.' When you encounter elaborate time expressions, consider whether simpler temporal words achieve the same meaning more efficiently.

Question 6

While reviewing a short story, a writer noticed that one paragraph repeated information about the main character’s fear of thunderstorms. The writer decided to keep the first mention because it explained why the character avoided camping. The second mention added no new detail, so the writer planned to delete it out of the draft.

Which choice is the clearest and most concise?

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. take it out of it
  3. remove it out
  4. delete it
Explanation: This question addresses redundant verb phrases where multiple words unnecessarily repeat the same action. The phrase 'delete it out' is redundant because 'delete' already means to remove completely. The correct choice is simply 'delete it,' which expresses the action concisely. Choices C and D add more unnecessary words. When you see verb phrases with extra prepositions or particles that don't add meaning (like 'out' with 'delete' or 'up' with 'finish'), choose the simpler version.

Question 7

The instructions for the assignment were not clear and confusing to many students.

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. unclear and confusing
  3. confusing
  4. not clear
Explanation: This question tests recognition of redundant negative constructions that express the same concept twice. The phrase 'not clear and confusing' is redundant because both parts express the same idea - if something is 'not clear,' it is by definition 'confusing.' Choice C eliminates this redundancy by using just 'confusing.' Choice B maintains some redundancy, and choice D is less precise. When you see negative constructions paired with related adjectives, check whether they're saying the same thing.

Question 8

The author wrote a novel that was based on real events that happened in the past.

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. based on historical events
  3. based on past events
  4. based on real past events
Explanation: This question tests elimination of wordy phrases that can be expressed more concisely. The phrase 'based on real events that happened in the past' is unnecessarily wordy because events that 'happened' are inherently 'in the past,' and 'real events' in historical context typically refers to 'historical events.' Choice B provides the most concise expression. Choices C and D maintain some wordiness. Look for opportunities to combine concepts into more precise, concise terms.

Question 9

The lecture was filled with numerous descriptions of the artist's techniques.

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. full of descriptions
  3. full of many descriptions
  4. filled with descriptions
Explanation: This question targets unnecessarily specific quantification that doesn't add meaningful information. The phrase 'filled with numerous descriptions' uses 'numerous' unnecessarily because 'filled with' already suggests a substantial quantity. Choice D maintains the meaning while eliminating the unnecessary quantifier. Choices B and C maintain some wordiness. When quantity is already implied by the context or other words, additional quantifiers may be redundant.

Question 10

"The Architects of the Ocean\n\nThey are visible from space, yet they are built by creatures no larger than a teacup. Coral reefs, often called the "rainforests of the sea," are the work of tiny animals known as polyps. Each of these soft-bodied organisms are [35] related to jellyfish and anemones. Using minerals drawn from the seawater, the polyp constructs a hard, protective skeleton around its base.\n\nThis construction process, repeated by billions of polyps over thousands of years, create the massive limestone structures [36] that form a reef. The polyps do not work alone; they share a symbiotic relationship with microscopic algae called zooxanthellae. The algae live inside the polyp's tissue, providing food through photosynthesis and lending the coral its vivid pigmentation. [37] In return, the polyp offers the algae a safe home and access to sunlight.\n\nThe scale of this collaboration is staggering. The Great Barrier Reef in Australia, which stretches over 1,400 miles, [38] is the largest living structure on Earth. It is composed of nearly 3,000 individual reefs and is home to a diverse array of different species [39] of marine life. From microscopic plankton to massive humpback whales, the reef supports a complex food web. [40]\n\nDespite their size, reefs are fragile. Rising ocean temperatures can cause the polyps to expel their algal partners, a phenomenon known as bleaching. Without the algae, the coral turns white and may starve. However, [41] scientists are working to identify heat-resistant coral strains. By understanding the biology of these master builders, we hope to ensure that the "architects of the ocean" continue to thrive. [42] [43]"

Which choice is the most concise?

  1. NO CHANGE
  2. is home to a diverse array of species
  3. is home to a diverse array of different species and types
  4. is home to various different species
Explanation: This is a conciseness question testing elimination of redundancy. You can tell because the question asks which choice is "most concise," and all options convey essentially the same meaning with different amounts of words. The ACT strongly prefers writing that eliminates unnecessary repetition while preserving full meaning. When you see this question type, identify redundant words (words that repeat the same concept) and choose the leanest option that loses no meaning. Choice B ("is home to a diverse array of species") is correct because it efficiently conveys the full meaning without redundancy. "Diverse array" already implies variety and difference, so adding "different" is unnecessary repetition. Similarly, "species" inherently means different types of organisms. Choice A (NO CHANGE - "diverse array of different species") contains redundancy—both "diverse" and "different" convey the same basic idea of variety. Choice C ("diverse array of different species and types") piles on even more redundancy by adding "types," which means essentially the same thing as "species" in this context. Choice D ("various different species") keeps two words that mean the same thing ("various" and "different"). Pro tip: Watch for word pairs that mean the same thing: diverse/different, various/different, unique/one-of-a-kind, completely/totally, small/tiny, large/big. The ACT will test whether you recognize that one word is sufficient. When evaluating conciseness, ask: "If I remove this word, do I lose any meaning?" If not, cut it!