Consider the following sentence from a draft essay analyzing environmental policy:
"The task force's initial report left out critical empirical evidence regarding renewable infrastructure adoption, making its conclusions seem kind of sketchy."
Which of the following revisions best replaces the informal and imprecise language to maintain a formal academic tone?
- The task force's initial report omitted critical empirical evidence regarding renewable infrastructure adoption, thereby rendering its conclusions questionable.Cevap
- BThe task force's initial report left out critical empirical evidence regarding renewable infrastructure adoption, making its conclusions seem kind of sketchy.
- CThe task force's initial report did not include a lot of key data regarding renewable infrastructure adoption, making its conclusions seem somewhat iffy.
- DThe task force's initial report skipped over important facts regarding renewable infrastructure adoption, leading to conclusions that are mostly not good.
- EThe task force's initial report neglected stuff regarding renewable infrastructure adoption, causing its conclusions to be considered vague.
Cevap
The revision reading 'The task force's initial report omitted critical empirical evidence regarding renewable infrastructure adoption, thereby rendering its conclusions questionable.' best maintains a formal academic tone and precise diction.
The correct revision replaces casual phrasings with formal academic vocabulary ('omitted' instead of 'left out', and 'questionable' instead of 'kind of sketchy'), thereby establishing precise diction and an appropriate scholarly tone.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
Precise Diction and Formal Academic Tone