- A school district is considering replacing paper permission slips with a digital system. Administrators say the change would reduce lost forms and allow faster updates during emergencies. Teachers report spending class time tracking down missing signatures, and the front office says it fields dozens of calls each week from parents asking what their children missed. Critics worry that some families lack reliable internet access, but the district has already issued hotspots to students who need them. A pilot at one high school increased on-time responses from 52% to 89%. The district should adopt the digital system, which will be easier for parents than paper forms, sending reminders automatically. Which revision eliminates ambiguity in the bolded sentence?
Answer: The district should adopt the digital system that sends automatic reminders and is easier for parents than paper forms.
This question assesses grammar and mechanics, focusing on resolving ambiguous participial phrases to improve overall sentence clarity. The correct revision in choice D uses a restrictive relative clause 'that sends automatic reminders and is easier for parents than paper forms' to clearly attribute both benefits to the digital system without ambiguity. This structure parallels the two qualities, making it evident that the system both sends reminders and is easier, rather than leaving 'sending' dangling. By combining the ideas concisely, the revision avoids any confusion about what is sending reminders or what is being compared to paper forms. Choice A, however, introduces a coordination error with 'and it sends,' which creates a run-on feel and fails to integrate the ideas smoothly. Remember, when revising for clarity, opt for relative clauses to tightly connect descriptive phrases to their antecedents, ensuring the sentence flows logically.
- Read the following excerpt from a campus newspaper editorial (7 sentences). The writer argues that universities should publish clear criteria for scholarship renewals.
Every spring, students trade rumors about which scholarships will be renewed and which will quietly disappear. The financial aid office calls the process "holistic," a word that sounds humane until you need to pay rent. When criteria are hidden, students spend energy guessing what the institution wants instead of planning their lives. The office emailed students about renewal decisions, who were already anxious. Predictably, the message triggered a wave of frantic calls and half-informed speculation. Transparency would not eliminate disappointment, but it would eliminate confusion. A public rubric is not generosity; it is basic fairness.
Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: The office emailed students, who were already anxious, about renewal decisions.
This question focuses on eliminating misplaced modifiers to improve clarity. The correct answer (A) properly places the relative clause "who were already anxious" immediately after "students," making it clear that the students, not the decisions, were anxious. The original sentence incorrectly places this modifier after "decisions," creating the absurd suggestion that decisions can be anxious. Choice B maintains ambiguity with the pronoun "they," while C creates an awkward construction with unnecessary complexity. Choice D repeats the original error of suggesting decisions can be anxious. The transferable strategy is to place modifying phrases immediately adjacent to the words they modify to prevent confusion.
- Read the following excerpt from a transportation proposal and answer the question.
Buses are often criticized for being slow, but much of that slowness is designed into the street. A bus that stops in the travel lane must merge back into traffic at every stop, and each merge depends on the goodwill of drivers. Dedicated bus lanes reduce that friction, making service more reliable even when average speed changes only slightly. The proposal also includes all-door boarding, which reduces dwell time, and signal priority at major intersections. While reviewing the plan, the council members raised concerns about parking, limiting the lane to peak hours. If the city wants fewer cars downtown, it must stop treating curb parking as untouchable.
Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: While reviewing the plan, the council members raised concerns about parking and therefore limited the lane to peak hours.
This question addresses clarity through proper sentence structure to show cause-and-effect relationships. The original sentence creates ambiguity about whether the council members' concerns led to limiting the lane hours or whether these were separate actions. Choice A uses "and therefore" to explicitly connect the two actions causally: the council raised concerns about parking, and as a result, they limited the lane to peak hours. Choice B shifts to passive voice and creates confusion about who did what. Choice C uses "which" ambiguously—it could mean the concerns or the parking limited the lane. Choice D creates an illogical statement suggesting the lane was limited for council members specifically. The principle is to use explicit causal connectors (therefore, as a result, consequently) when showing how one action leads to another.
- Read the following excerpt from an environmental blog post and answer the question.
A city can't compost its way out of every climate problem, but food waste is a sensible place to start. When scraps go to landfills, they decompose without oxygen and release methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Our pilot program collected curbside compost from 3,200 households and diverted an estimated 180 tons of organic waste in six months. Participation rose when the city provided clear rules about what counts as "compostable," because residents stopped guessing and contaminating bins with plastic. To reduce contamination, the city mailed residents a guide, listing common mistakes. Small interventions matter when they make the right behavior easier than the wrong one.
Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: To reduce contamination, the city mailed residents a guide that listed common mistakes.
This question tests clarity through proper coordination of sentence elements and avoiding ambiguous modifiers. The original sentence places "listing common mistakes" as a participial phrase that could modify either "mailed" or "residents," creating confusion about who is doing the listing. Choice A resolves this by using a clear relative clause ("that listed common mistakes") to modify "guide," making it unambiguous that the guide contains the list. Choice B shifts to passive voice and loses the connection between the guide and the mistakes. Choice C incorrectly suggests the city is doing the mailing and listing simultaneously. Choice D creates an awkward interruption between "residents" and "a guide." The principle here is that relative clauses often provide clearer modification than participial phrases when ambiguity is possible.
- Read the following excerpt from a school-board op-ed (7 sentences). The writer argues that students need more time to read independently during the school day.
At last month's curriculum meeting, administrators celebrated a new "efficiency schedule" that trims five minutes from every class period. They argued that the reclaimed minutes, added together, will create space for test prep without "taking anything away." But reading is not a filler activity; it is the slow work that teaches students how to think in sentences longer than a slogan. When teachers lose even a few minutes, they cut the quiet parts first, because discussion and announcements feel urgent. By the end of the week, the schedule has stolen thirty minutes from students, which is enough time to finish a chapter sitting in the library. That loss is measurable, and so is the cost: fewer pages read, less stamina, and a narrower vocabulary. If the district wants higher scores, it should protect reading time rather than treating it as leftover.
Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: By the end of the week, the schedule has stolen thirty minutes from students—enough time for students to sit in the library and finish a chapter.
This question tests clarity through grammar and mechanics, specifically how punctuation and sentence structure affect meaning. The correct answer (C) uses an em dash to clearly connect "thirty minutes" with its purpose—"enough time for students to sit in the library and finish a chapter." This revision eliminates the dangling modifier problem in choices A and D, where "sitting in the library" awkwardly attaches to the wrong subject. Choice B's semicolon creates an illogical separation between the stolen time and its significance, making it seem like students are already sitting in the library rather than explaining what they could do with that time. The key strategy is to ensure modifiers clearly attach to their intended subjects and that punctuation logically connects related ideas.
- Read the following excerpt from a local newspaper column (about 175 words), then answer the question.
Our city's recycling program is popular in theory and frustrating in practice. Residents sort glass, paper, and plastics, but the collection schedule changes without warning, and bins sit at the curb for days. The sanitation department insists that contamination is the problem: too many greasy pizza boxes, too many plastic bags, too many "wish-cycled" items. But contamination is also a communication problem. The online guide is written like a legal document, and the printed mailer that arrives once a year cannot compete with daily habits.
To reduce contamination, the department posted new signs on the bins last month, which confused several apartment managers. The sentence is grammatically correct, but the pronoun "which" leaves readers unsure whether the signs or the month confused the managers. That ambiguity matters because the department needs feedback on the signs themselves.
Which revision eliminates ambiguity in the bolded sentence?
Answer: To reduce contamination, the department posted new signs on the bins last month; several apartment managers found the signs confusing.
This question addresses clarity through eliminating ambiguous pronoun references, a crucial grammar skill for precise writing. The original sentence's "which confused several apartment managers" creates uncertainty because "which" could refer to either "signs" or "last month," leaving readers unsure what caused the confusion. Choice B eliminates this ambiguity by replacing the relative clause with a semicolon and an independent clause that explicitly states "several apartment managers found the signs confusing," making the subject-object relationship unmistakable. Choice A maintains the problematic "which" construction, C illogically suggests the department's goals were confused, and D merely shifts the ambiguity to "during the month." The key strategy is to replace ambiguous relative clauses with clear independent clauses that explicitly name both the actor and the action.
- A nonprofit is urging the city to convert an abandoned rail corridor into a bike-and-walking trail. The nonprofit argues that trails increase foot traffic for small businesses and provide safe routes for commuters who cannot afford cars. Some neighbors fear noise and trespassing, but the nonprofit points to studies showing that well-lit trails with clear entrances can reduce illegal dumping by increasing regular use. The group also notes that the corridor currently attracts broken glass and weeds, not families. While presenting the plan, the director promised to address residents' concerns about safety, lighting, and maintenance, which were frequent. Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: While presenting the plan, the director promised to address residents' frequent concerns about safety, lighting, and maintenance.
This question shows how modifier placement affects clarity when multiple descriptors are present. The original sentence's "which were frequent" at the end could modify "maintenance" alone or all three concerns, creating ambiguity about what exactly was frequent. Choice A solves this by placing "frequent" directly before "concerns," making it clear that the concerns themselves (not just maintenance) were frequent. Choices B and D maintain the ambiguous "which" clause at the end, while Choice C's interrupting placement disrupts the flow without adding clarity. When multiple items in a series need modification, place the modifier before the entire series rather than after it to avoid ambiguity.
- A school district is considering switching to later start times for high school students. The superintendent argues that teenagers' sleep cycles make early mornings especially difficult, and she cites attendance data showing first-period absences are highest on Mondays. Teachers worry that later dismissal will cut into sports and after-school jobs, but the superintendent counters that fatigue already harms performance. She adds that neighboring districts that shifted start times saw small but consistent GPA increases over two years. When the board reviewed the proposal, they said it would help students, which surprised the superintendent. Which change best clarifies meaning in the bolded sentence?
Answer: When the board reviewed the proposal, the board said the proposal would help students, which surprised the superintendent.
This question demonstrates how pronoun clarity contributes to effective communication through proper grammar usage. The original sentence uses "they" (plural) to refer to "the board" (singular collective noun), creating pronoun-antecedent disagreement, and the vague "it" could refer to either the board or the proposal. Choice B eliminates all ambiguity by explicitly restating "the board" and "the proposal," ensuring readers know exactly what performed the action and what would help students. Choices A, C, and D all maintain problematic pronouns—"it" remains ambiguous and "they" still disagrees with the singular "board." When pronouns create confusion, replacing them with specific nouns is the clearest solution, even if it seems repetitive.
- A city council is debating whether to replace a busy four-way stop near two schools with a roundabout. In a memo, the transportation director argues that roundabouts reduce severe crashes by slowing turning traffic and eliminating head-on collisions. The director notes that in the past three years, the intersection averaged 18 minor fender-benders annually and two injury crashes, mostly from hurried left turns during afternoon pickup. Some residents worry that students will be confused, but the director points out that nearby towns added roundabouts and reported fewer ambulance calls. After reviewing the crash reports, the director told the council the roundabout would make the intersection safer for students in a letter. Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: After reviewing the crash reports, the director told the council in a letter that the roundabout would make the intersection safer for students.
This question tests how modifier placement affects clarity through proper grammar and mechanics. The original sentence places "in a letter" at the end, creating ambiguity about whether the students are "in a letter" or the communication occurred "in a letter." Choice A correctly positions "in a letter" immediately after "told the council," making it clear that the letter was the medium of communication, not a description of where students are located. Choice B's placement after "students" creates the same ambiguity as the original, while Choice C suggests students themselves are "in a letter." When modifiers are misplaced, they attach to the nearest noun, creating unintended meanings—always position prepositional phrases immediately after what they modify.
- A town is deciding whether to convert an unused rail corridor into a bike-and-walk trail. Proponents argue that trails increase local commerce by bringing foot traffic to small businesses and provide a safe route for students to reach school. Opponents worry about maintenance costs and privacy for adjacent homeowners. In nearby towns, property values increased modestly within a half mile of similar trails, and emergency services report fewer bike accidents on roads after protected routes were built. The proposed trail would be funded partly by a state grant that expires next year. The mayor urged residents to support the trail at the meeting, which would connect three neighborhoods. Which change best clarifies meaning in the bolded sentence?
Answer: At the meeting, the mayor urged residents to support the trail, which would connect three neighborhoods.
This question examines grammar and mechanics, emphasizing the repositioning of phrases to resolve modifier ambiguity and promote clarity. In choice A, placing 'At the meeting' at the beginning separates the prepositional phrase from the relative clause 'which would connect three neighborhoods,' clearly linking 'which' to 'trail' instead of 'meeting.' This shift ensures the reader understands the trail's connective function without misattributing it to the meeting. The comma after 'trail' further aids in setting off the nonrestrictive clause properly. Choice C fails by keeping 'at the meeting' next to 'which,' perpetuating the ambiguity that the meeting connects neighborhoods. A useful strategy is to rearrange introductory phrases to isolate modifiers, guaranteeing they modify the correct noun for unambiguous communication.
- A state agency is considering a rule requiring restaurants to display calorie counts on menus. Supporters argue that transparent information helps consumers make choices and can encourage restaurants to offer healthier options. Restaurant owners counter that printing new menus is costly and that calorie counts can vary based on portion size. However, the agency's report notes that most menu updates already occur several times a year, and digital menu boards can be updated at minimal cost. In cities with similar rules, surveys found that customers noticed the information even when they didn't change their orders. The agency should adopt the rule to inform diners, posting numbers that are easy to understand. Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: The agency should adopt the rule to inform diners by posting calorie numbers that are easy to understand.
This question probes grammar and mechanics, focusing on converting dangling participles into prepositional phrases to achieve clarity. Choice B integrates 'by posting calorie numbers that are easy to understand' as the means of informing diners, clearly connecting the action to the rule's purpose without ambiguity. This preposition 'by' specifies the method, ensuring the reader knows how the rule informs, rather than leaving 'posting' unattached. The relative clause 'that are easy to understand' further refines 'numbers,' adding precision to the description. Choice A retains the dangling 'posting' phrase, which could misleadingly modify 'diners' or the agency. Always incorporate participial phrases into the main clause with prepositions like 'by' to denote methods clearly in instructional sentences.
- A university is deciding whether to require a one-credit financial literacy course for all first-year students. Supporters argue that many students sign loan documents without understanding interest or repayment plans, and they cite campus survey results showing that 62% of freshmen cannot define "APR." Opponents say the curriculum is already crowded and that students can find budgeting advice online. The proposal's author responds that online advice is inconsistent and often tied to advertising. The committee recommended the course to the provost after meeting for three hours on Friday. Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: After meeting for three hours on Friday, the committee recommended the course to the provost.
This question tests how modifier placement affects temporal clarity in sentences. The original places "on Friday" at the end, creating ambiguity about whether the meeting or the recommendation occurred on Friday. Choice A correctly positions "on Friday" immediately after "three hours," making it clear that Friday was when the meeting happened, not when the recommendation was made. Choice B maintains the original ambiguity, Choice C suggests the recommendation itself happened on Friday after an earlier meeting, and Choice D adds an unnecessary and vague comment. Time-related modifiers should be placed immediately adjacent to the action they modify to prevent confusion about sequence and timing.
- Read the following excerpt from a campus newspaper editorial and answer the question.
The university's attendance policy for large lectures is less about accountability than about data. Administrators want to know which courses are overenrolled, which time slots are underused, and where students are dropping off. The problem is that the current system punishes students for technical failures: a dead phone battery or a malfunctioning scanner can count as an absence. Faculty members have proposed a reasonable fix—allowing two "no questions asked" missed scans—while still collecting attendance patterns over the semester. Because it is often unreliable, students resent the system. If the goal is information rather than discipline, the policy should not feel like a trap.
Which revision eliminates ambiguity in the bolded sentence?
Answer: Because the attendance-scanning system is often unreliable, students resent it.
This question addresses ambiguity in pronoun reference when multiple antecedents are possible. The original sentence uses "it" without a clear antecedent—does "it" refer to "the system" or something else mentioned earlier? Choice A eliminates this ambiguity by explicitly naming "the attendance-scanning system" as the subject, making it absolutely clear what is unreliable and what students resent. Choice B maintains the ambiguous "it" and adds unnecessary passive voice. Choice C is clearer than the original but still uses "the system" without full specification. Choice D redundantly repeats "often unreliable" and maintains pronoun ambiguity. The strategy is to replace vague pronouns with specific nouns when the antecedent could be unclear, especially at the beginning of sentences.
- In a blog post about public libraries, a writer argues that eliminating late fees increases access without meaningfully reducing revenue. The post describes how some patrons avoid checking out books when they fear penalties, especially families who budget carefully. The writer cites a neighboring county that removed fines and reported more renewals and fewer conflicts at the circulation desk. The post also notes that libraries can still charge for lost materials, distinguishing between punishment and replacement. The writer concludes that libraries should be judged by community use, not by how effectively they collect small debts. The policy helps patrons who have overdue books, which the library board adopted last year. Which change best clarifies meaning in the bolded sentence?
Answer: The policy, which the library board adopted last year, helps patrons who have overdue books.
This question tests clarity through proper placement of modifying clauses, a grammar skill essential for preventing misreading. The original sentence places "which the library board adopted last year" immediately after "patrons," creating the absurd suggestion that the library board adopted patrons rather than the policy. Choice A corrects this by placing the modifying clause directly after "policy," its intended referent, using appropriate punctuation to set off the nonrestrictive clause. Choice B creates even more confusion by interrupting "patrons" and "who have overdue books," Choice C uses a semicolon correctly but changes the sentence structure unnecessarily, and Choice D creates a wordy passive construction. The key strategy is to place modifying clauses immediately adjacent to the words they modify, using commas to set off nonessential information.
- A neighborhood association is urging the city to plant more street trees. Members argue that trees reduce urban heat, improve air quality, and make walking more pleasant, which can increase local shopping. Some residents worry about fallen branches during storms and the cost of watering young trees. The city's public works department reports that newer drought-tolerant species have lower maintenance needs, and a local nonprofit has offered volunteers for the first two years of care. During last summer's heat wave, temperatures on treeless blocks were measured several degrees higher than on shaded streets. Planting trees can cool the neighborhood, lowering temperatures on streets in summer. Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: Planting trees can cool the neighborhood by lowering summer street temperatures.
This question assesses grammar and mechanics, stressing the addition of prepositions to clarify participial phrases and boost sentence clarity. Choice A introduces 'by lowering summer street temperatures' to explicitly show how planting trees cools the neighborhood, transforming the dangling participle into a clear adverbial phrase. This revision specifies 'summer street temperatures,' pinpointing the seasonal and locational context without ambiguity. The preposition 'by' links the action directly to the result, improving logical flow. Choice C uses 'which lowers,' but 'which' incorrectly modifies 'neighborhood,' suggesting it lowers temperatures. When dealing with methods or results, add 'by' to participial phrases to explicitly connect cause and effect in descriptive sentences.
- Read the following excerpt from a local-news column (6 sentences). The writer argues that cities should prioritize shade over decorative lighting in public spaces.
Our downtown installed string lights over the plaza, and the mayor called it "an investment in community." The lights look charming in December, but in July the plaza is an empty skillet. People do not avoid the space because they dislike one another; they avoid it because there is nowhere to cool down. After the city removed the only mature trees, it promised residents more comfort, which sounded like a joke. The budget memo later clarified that "comfort" meant brighter bulbs and a new photo backdrop. If we want public life, we should start with shade.
Which revision eliminates ambiguity in the bolded sentence?
Answer: After the city removed the only mature trees, its promise of more comfort sounded like a joke to residents.
This question focuses on eliminating ambiguity through clear pronoun reference and sentence structure. The correct answer (D) transforms the sentence to avoid the ambiguous "which" in the original by making "its promise of more comfort" the subject that "sounded like a joke to residents." This revision eliminates confusion about what exactly "sounded like a joke"—the promise itself, not the act of promising. Choices A and B retain ambiguity about whether the promise or the act of promising sounded like a joke, while C creates a grammatically incorrect construction ("the residents sounded like a joke about"). The transferable strategy is to restructure sentences to eliminate ambiguous pronoun references by making the intended referent the clear subject of the action.
- A state legislature is debating whether to ban single-use plastic bags at grocery stores. Supporters argue that plastic bags clog storm drains and persist in waterways, harming wildlife. Opponents claim that bans inconvenience shoppers and may increase purchases of thicker trash bags. A coastal cleanup group reports that plastic bags are among the most common items collected on local beaches, and several retailers say they already offer reusable alternatives. The proposed bill would allow stores to sell paper bags for a small fee and would exempt certain medical uses. Lawmakers should pass the ban to reduce litter, charging a fee for paper bags. Which revision eliminates ambiguity in the bolded sentence?
Answer: Lawmakers should pass the ban to reduce litter by requiring stores to charge a fee for paper bags.
This question examines grammar and mechanics, emphasizing the integration of prepositional phrases to eliminate dangling modifiers and improve clarity. Choice D uses 'by requiring stores to charge a fee for paper bags' to specify how the ban reduces litter, clearly attributing the fee-charging to the ban's mechanism. This structure connects the purpose 'to reduce litter' with the method, avoiding any confusion about who or what is charging. The infinitive 'by requiring' adds precision to the legislative action. Choice A keeps the dangling 'charging' phrase, which could imply lawmakers or litter are charging fees. A key strategy is to use 'by' with gerunds or infinitives to detail processes, ensuring actions are unambiguously linked to their agents.
- Read the following excerpt from a workplace ethics memo (6 sentences). The writer argues that companies should limit after-hours messaging.
The company handbook praises "work-life balance," but the group chat tells the truth at 11:47 p.m. Managers say messages are optional, yet everyone knows silence is noticed. When the boundary between work and home disappears, rest becomes another performance. Employees who respond fastest earn praise, which encourages it. Over time, the habit becomes expectation, and expectation becomes policy without ever being written down. A simple rule—no nonemergency messages after hours—would protect both productivity and health.
Which revision eliminates ambiguity in the bolded sentence?
Answer: Employees who respond fastest earn praise, which encourages fast responses.
This question focuses on eliminating vague pronoun reference to improve clarity. The correct answer (A) replaces the ambiguous "it" with the specific phrase "fast responses," making clear what exactly is being encouraged by the praise. The original sentence leaves readers guessing whether "it" refers to praise, responding fast, or something else entirely. Choice B incorrectly suggests that employees themselves are encouraged rather than a specific behavior. Choice C doubles down on ambiguity with two instances of "it." Choice D becomes unnecessarily convoluted and loses the clear cause-and-effect relationship. The transferable strategy is to replace vague pronouns with specific nouns that precisely identify what is being discussed, even if this creates slight redundancy.
- In an editorial for the school newspaper, a student argues that the district should start classes later because sleep affects learning. The student cites a local survey in which 62% of students reported getting fewer than seven hours of sleep on school nights and notes that first-period tardiness is highest on Mondays. The editorial claims that shifting the bell schedule by 45 minutes would reduce absences and improve attention without reducing instructional time because the district can shorten passing periods. The writer also acknowledges that athletics and after-school jobs would need adjustments but argues that public policy should prioritize student health over convenience. By moving the start time later, teachers who already struggle to keep students awake will benefit. Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: Teachers who already struggle to keep students awake will benefit if the district moves the start time later.
This question tests clarity through proper modifier placement, a key grammar skill for preventing misreading. The original sentence contains a dangling modifier: "By moving the start time later" appears to modify "teachers," suggesting teachers are moving the start time, when the intended meaning is that the district would move it. Choice B corrects this by placing "Teachers who already struggle to keep students awake" as the clear subject, followed by "will benefit if the district moves the start time later," which explicitly identifies who performs the action. Choice A maintains the dangling modifier problem, Choice C awkwardly splits the beneficiaries into students and teachers, and Choice D creates passive voice that obscures agency. The strategy here is to ensure opening modifiers clearly connect to the subject they modify—when a sentence begins with "By [doing something]," the subject immediately following must be the one performing that action.
- A neighborhood association is pressuring the city to enforce existing noise ordinances more consistently. The association claims that late-night construction and amplified music have increased since new restaurants opened on the main street. Restaurant owners respond that the area was rezoned for mixed use and that occasional noise is part of a lively district. The association counters that predictability matters: residents can tolerate events when they are scheduled, but not random disruptions at 2 a.m. The association asked the city to ticket businesses that violate the ordinance regularly, not the ones that comply. Which revision most improves clarity of the bolded sentence?
Answer: The association asked the city to ticket businesses that regularly violate the ordinance, not businesses that comply with it.
This question tests how adverb placement affects meaning in sentences with contrasts. The original sentence places "regularly" ambiguously—it could modify "ticket" (ticket regularly) or "violate" (regularly violate), creating confusion about whether the association wants regular ticketing or is targeting regular violators. Choice B eliminates this ambiguity by placing "regularly" directly before "violate," making it clear that the association wants tickets for businesses that are repeat offenders, not for all violators on a regular basis. Choice A maintains the ambiguity, Choice C nonsensically contrasts "regularly" with "consistently," and Choice D's excessive commas create further confusion. Adverbs should be placed immediately before the verbs they modify to prevent misinterpretation.
