Adult Literacy Intermediate Quiz: Reducing Repetition
10 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Reducing RepetitionQuestion 1 of 10

The community center is beside the library. The community center opens at 8 a.m. The library opens at 10 a.m.

Which revision reduces repetition and clearly identifies the opening time of each building?

The community center is beside the library, and it opens at 8 a.m. instead of 10 a.m.
Beside the library, the community center and the library open between 8 a.m. and 10 a.m.
Beside the library, the community center opens at 8 a.m., two hours before the library.
The library beside the community center opens at 8 a.m., two hours before the center.
← Back to quizzes

Adult Literacy Intermediate Quiz

Adult Literacy Intermediate Quiz: Reducing Repetition

Practice Reducing Repetition in Adult Literacy Intermediate with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Reducing Repetition, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Adult Literacy Intermediate.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

The community center is beside the library. The community center opens at 8 a.m. The library opens at 10 a.m.

Which revision reduces repetition and clearly identifies the opening time of each building?

  1. The community center is beside the library, and it opens at 8 a.m. instead of 10 a.m.
  2. Beside the library, the community center and the library open between 8 a.m. and 10 a.m.
  3. Beside the library, the community center opens at 8 a.m., two hours before the library. (correct answer)
  4. The library beside the community center opens at 8 a.m., two hours before the center.
Explanation: When a question asks you to "reduce repetition" while keeping information clear, look for the answer that combines ideas efficiently without losing meaning or creating new confusion. The original three sentences repeat the phrase "community center" and "library" multiple times while stating each opening time separately. A good revision merges this information using comparison language — saying one thing opens "two hours before" the other tells you both times in a single phrase. Choice C does exactly this. "Beside the library, the community center opens at 8 a.m., two hours before the library" — you immediately know the location relationship, the community center's exact time, and can calculate that the library opens at 10 a.m. It's concise, accurate, and unambiguous. That's the correct answer. Choice A introduces the word "it," which creates a pronoun ambiguity problem — "it" could refer to either building. The phrase "instead of 10 a.m." also implies the community center changed its hours rather than comparing the two buildings. Choice B says both buildings open "between 8 a.m. and 10 a.m.," which is misleading — it sounds like both open sometime in that window rather than each having a fixed, distinct time. Choice D actually reverses the facts by saying the library opens at 8 a.m., when the passage clearly states the community center opens at 8 a.m. That's a factual error, not just a style problem. A useful strategy: when revising sentences, always check that the new version stays factually accurate before evaluating style. A smooth-sounding sentence that changes the meaning is always wrong, no matter how clean it reads.

Question 2

A supervisor must approve shift-change requests. A supervisor must approve overtime requests. Employees may submit shift-change requests and overtime requests through the online portal.

Which revision best reduces repetition while keeping the approval and submission rules clear?

  1. Shift changes and overtime requests may be approved or submitted through the online portal by a supervisor.
  2. A supervisor must approve shift-change and overtime requests. Employees may submit either type of request through the online portal. (correct answer)
  3. A supervisor may submit shift-change and overtime requests through the portal before employees approve them.
  4. Employees may approve both types of requests through the online portal before sending them to a supervisor.
Explanation: When a question asks you to "reduce repetition while keeping rules clear," your job is to combine overlapping ideas without changing who does what. The original passage has two separate roles: supervisors approve, and employees submit. Any good revision must preserve both of those facts. Choice B does exactly that. It combines the two approval sentences ("A supervisor must approve shift-change requests" and "A supervisor must approve overtime requests") into one efficient sentence by grouping the request types together. Then it keeps the submission rule separate and clear. Nothing is lost, and nothing is distorted — B is the correct answer. Choice A scrambles the roles entirely. It suggests a supervisor might submit requests and employees might approve them, which reverses the original meaning. Combining sentences is only helpful if the meaning stays accurate. Choice C makes the same role-reversal error in a different way. It says a supervisor submits requests through the portal before employees approve them — the complete opposite of the original rules. This is a classic trap: a sentence that sounds organized but quietly flips who has authority. Choice D gives employees the power to approve requests, which directly contradicts the original passage. The original is clear that only a supervisor approves. Introducing "employees may approve" creates a factual error, not a simplification. Study tip: When editing for conciseness, always ask yourself two questions: Who does what? and Did that change in the revision? If the roles or responsibilities shifted, the revision failed — even if it sounds smoother.

Question 3

If a tenant sees a serious water leak, the tenant should call the building manager. If the tenant cannot reach the building manager, the tenant should call the emergency maintenance line.

Which revision reduces repetition while preserving the required order of contact?

  1. A tenant who sees a serious water leak should call the building manager; if the manager cannot be reached, the tenant should call emergency maintenance. (correct answer)
  2. A tenant who sees a serious water leak should call the manager or emergency maintenance, depending on which one answers first.
  3. If a tenant sees a serious water leak, the building manager should call emergency maintenance when the tenant cannot be reached.
  4. When they cannot reach them about a serious water leak, they should call the emergency maintenance line instead.
Explanation: When a question asks you to revise a passage for clarity, focus on two things: does the revision preserve the original meaning, and does it cut unnecessary repetition without creating new confusion? The original passage repeats "the tenant" three times and uses two separate sentences to express what is really one conditional idea — call the manager first, then call emergency maintenance if needed. A strong revision keeps that step-by-step logic intact while tightening the language. Choice A does exactly this. It combines both steps into one smooth sentence using a semicolon to link them. The order is clear — manager first, emergency maintenance second — and the word "tenant" only appears once without losing clarity. This is your correct answer. Choice B fails because it changes the meaning entirely. The original requires a specific order of contact; B suggests calling whichever line "answers first," which removes the required priority sequence. Choice C introduces a factual error. It says the building manager should call emergency maintenance when the tenant cannot be reached — this reverses who is doing what. The tenant is supposed to make the calls, not the manager. Choice D is vague and confusing. The pronouns "they" and "them" have no clear reference — you cannot tell who cannot reach whom, or who is calling whom. Unclear pronouns are a common writing flaw, and this choice is a good example of one. Study tip: On revision questions, always ask yourself two things: Does the meaning stay the same? and Is it actually clearer? If a revision changes meaning or adds confusion, eliminate it immediately.

Question 4

The survey shows that bus riders want later evening service. The survey also shows that bus riders want more weekend routes. The transportation committee will use the survey when planning next year's schedule.

Which revision best reduces repetition while keeping the survey results and the committee's purpose accurate?

  1. Bus riders completed the survey so the transportation committee could plan later evening service and more weekend routes.
  2. The survey shows that bus riders want later evening service, while the committee wants additional weekend routes next year.
  3. The survey shows that bus riders want later evening service and more weekend routes; the committee will use these findings to plan next year's schedule. (correct answer)
  4. The committee's survey will result in later evening service and more weekend routes when next year's schedule is finalized.
Explanation: When a question asks you to reduce repetition while keeping information accurate, your job is to combine ideas efficiently without losing or distorting any key details. Look for an answer that merges the original meaning cleanly into fewer words. The original passage has three sentences, but two of them repeat the phrase "the survey shows." The core information is simple: the survey revealed two things (later evening service and more weekend routes), and the committee plans to use those findings. Option C handles this perfectly by joining the two survey results with "and," then using a semicolon to connect that information to the committee's purpose. Nothing is added, nothing is removed, and the repetition is eliminated. Option A distorts the meaning by implying bus riders took the survey so that the committee could plan specific changes — but the passage never says that was the riders' intention. That's an invented cause-and-effect relationship. Option B introduces a new inaccuracy: it says the committee wants more weekend routes, when the survey clearly shows that bus riders want them. Swapping who wants what is a significant error. Option D goes too far by stating the result is already decided — "will result in later evening service and more weekend routes" — but the passage only says the committee will use the survey when planning. That's a much stronger claim than the original supports. C is correct because it combines without distorting. A good strategy here: always check whether an answer changes who does or wants something, or whether it turns a possibility into a certainty. Those are the most common traps in revision questions.

Question 5

Rosa gave the completed form to Mina because Rosa was leaving for lunch. Rosa asked Mina to place the form in the supervisor's mailbox.

Which revision reduces repetition without making it unclear who was leaving or who should deliver the form?

  1. Before leaving for lunch, Rosa gave the completed form to Mina and asked her to place it in the supervisor's mailbox. (correct answer)
  2. Rosa gave the completed form to Mina before she left for lunch and asked her to place it in the supervisor's mailbox.
  3. Before Mina left for lunch, Rosa gave her the completed form to place in the supervisor's mailbox.
  4. Rosa left for lunch after giving the form to Mina, who then asked her to place it in the supervisor's mailbox.
Explanation: When revising sentences to cut repetition, your job is to combine ideas efficiently — but you must never create ambiguity about who is doing what. This question tests whether you can spot the difference between clean revision and confusing revision. The original passage repeats "Rosa" twice and splits one logical action across two sentences. The best revision merges everything into one clear sentence where Rosa is the obvious subject throughout. Answer A does exactly this: "Before leaving for lunch, Rosa gave the completed form to Mina and asked her to place it in the supervisor's mailbox." The opening phrase "before leaving for lunch" clearly refers to Rosa, since Rosa is the subject of the main clause. The pronoun "her" naturally refers to Mina, the only other person mentioned. No repetition, no confusion — A is the correct answer. Answer B creates a pronoun problem: "before she left for lunch" is ambiguous because both Rosa and Mina are present, and "she" could refer to either one. Answer C changes the meaning entirely by implying Mina was leaving for lunch, which contradicts the original passage. Answer D introduces a new problem — it says Mina "asked her" to place the form, which reverses who made the request; in the original, Rosa asked Mina, not the other way around. A useful strategy: when a revision question involves pronouns like "she," "her," or "they," pause and ask yourself, who does this pronoun actually point to? If there are two people of the same gender in the sentence, a pronoun can easily attach to the wrong one — and that's exactly the trap answers B, C, and D all set.

Question 6

The workshop is free at no cost. Advance registration ahead of time is required because seating space is limited.

Which revision removes repeated ideas while preserving all important information?

  1. The workshop is free because advance registration is required when the available seating is limited.
  2. The workshop is free, but advance registration is required because seating is limited. (correct answer)
  3. Although seating is limited, the workshop requires either a fee or advance registration.
  4. The workshop has no cost, and advance registration is suggested because seats may be available.
Explanation: When a question asks you to "remove repeated ideas while preserving all important information," you're being tested on redundancy—saying the same thing twice without adding meaning. Your job is to find the option that cuts the extras without losing anything important or changing the meaning. Look at the original passage: "free at no cost" repeats itself ("free" and "no cost" mean the same thing), and "advance registration ahead of time" also repeats ("advance" already means ahead of time). A clean revision should eliminate both redundancies while keeping three key facts: the workshop is free, registration is required, and seating is limited. Answer B does exactly this. "The workshop is free" handles cost, "advance registration is required" handles enrollment (dropping the redundant "ahead of time"), and "because seating is limited" explains why—all three facts intact, no repetition. Answer A changes the meaning entirely by incorrectly linking "free" as the reason registration is required, which the original never says. That's a logic error, not just a style choice. Answer C introduces a completely false idea—that the workshop might charge a fee—which directly contradicts the original. It also creates confusion about whether registration or a fee is needed. Answer D weakens two facts at once: "no cost" is a clunky replacement for "free," and changing "required" to "suggested" and "limited" to "may be available" makes the message less urgent and less accurate. A useful tip: when revising for redundancy, list the unique facts in the original, then check whether each answer choice keeps all of them—without adding or distorting anything.

Question 7

Time sheets are due Friday. Expense forms are due Monday. Employees should send time sheets to payroll. Employees should send expense forms to accounting.

Which revision best reduces repetition while keeping each document's correct deadline and destination?

  1. Employees should send time sheets to payroll by Friday and expense forms to accounting by Monday. (correct answer)
  2. Employees should send time sheets and expense forms to payroll by Friday or to accounting by Monday.
  3. Employees should send time sheets to accounting by Monday and expense forms to payroll by Friday.
  4. Employees should send both documents to payroll by Friday and provide copies to accounting by Monday.
Explanation: When a question asks you to "reduce repetition while keeping information accurate," your job is to find the answer that combines ideas efficiently without mixing up or losing any original details. Think of it like packing a suitcase — everything needs to fit neatly, and nothing important gets left behind or put in the wrong pocket. The original passage gives you four facts: time sheets go to payroll, time sheets are due Friday, expense forms go to accounting, and expense forms are due Monday. A good revision preserves all four facts in fewer words. Choice A does exactly this — it links each document to its correct destination and deadline in one clean sentence: time sheets → payroll → Friday, and expense forms → accounting → Monday. Nothing is missing, nothing is swapped. Choice B is tempting because it sounds efficient, but it's dangerously vague. The phrasing "to payroll by Friday or to accounting by Monday" makes it unclear which document goes where, creating confusion rather than clarity. Choice C keeps the structure of A but swaps the destinations and deadlines entirely — time sheets go to accounting and expense forms go to payroll, which directly contradicts the original passage. That's not revision; that's misinformation. Choice D introduces a new instruction ("provide copies") that wasn't in the original passage, changing the meaning rather than simply condensing it. A useful strategy: when evaluating revisions, mentally check each fact from the original against the new sentence. If any fact is missing, swapped, or added without basis, eliminate that choice. Accuracy always comes before efficiency.

Question 8

Applicants must write their name on the first page. Applicants must write their address on the first page. Applicants must write their identification number on the first page.

Which revision most clearly reduces repetition without changing where any information belongs?

  1. Applicants must write their name on the first page and also list their address and identification number.
  2. Applicants must write their name, address, and identification number on the first three pages.
  3. Applicants must write their name, then their address, before putting their identification number on the first page.
  4. Applicants must write their name, address, and identification number on the first page. (correct answer)
Explanation: When a question asks you to reduce repetition "without changing where any information belongs," you're being tested on sentence combining — the skill of merging redundant sentences into one clear, accurate statement. The key is to consolidate only what's truly repeated while keeping every detail intact. In the original passage, three sentences each end with "on the first page." That phrase is the repetition. The three pieces of information — name, address, and identification number — all belong on the first page. The cleanest fix lists all three items together and states their location once. That's exactly what D does: "Applicants must write their name, address, and identification number on the first page." Nothing is added, nothing is moved, and the clutter is gone. A is close but introduces the phrase "and also list," which changes the verb and creates an awkward split — "write their name" vs. "list their address and identification number" — as if these are two different tasks with different actions. B changes the meaning entirely by saying "the first three pages" instead of "the first page," which moves information to different pages — directly violating the requirement. C adds unnecessary sequencing words ("then," "before putting") that imply a required order not mentioned in the original, making the sentence more complicated rather than simpler. A helpful strategy: when combining sentences, ask yourself two questions — Did I keep all the original details? and Did I accidentally add or change anything? Any answer that shifts meaning, changes a fact, or introduces new conditions is wrong, even if it sounds smooth.

Question 9

Use a clean cloth to wipe the counter. Use a separate clean cloth to wipe the food slicer.

Which revision reduces repetition without weakening the safety instruction?

  1. Use one clean cloth to wipe the counter and then wipe the food slicer.
  2. Use a clean cloth on the counter and another cloth on the food slicer.
  3. After wiping the counter with a clean cloth, wipe the food slicer separately.
  4. Using separate clean cloths, wipe the counter and the food slicer. (correct answer)
Explanation: When a question asks you to "reduce repetition without weakening" a safety instruction, you need to check two things simultaneously: Does the revision cut unnecessary words? And does it preserve the original meaning — including any safety-critical details? The original passage has two key safety elements: the cloths must be clean, and they must be separate (one per surface). Any revision that drops or blurs either detail fails the test, no matter how smooth it sounds. Option D — "Using separate clean cloths, wipe the counter and the food slicer" — keeps both "separate" and "clean" while combining the two sentences into one efficient instruction. It reduces the repetition of "Use a clean cloth to wipe" without sacrificing anything that matters. That makes D the correct answer. Option A fails on safety grounds. Saying "use one clean cloth to wipe the counter and then wipe the food slicer" implies a single cloth for both surfaces — the opposite of what the original instructs. This is the most dangerous revision. Option B drops the word "clean" before "another cloth," which weakens the instruction. A reader might assume only the first cloth needs to be clean, leaving a hygiene gap. Option C says "wipe the food slicer separately," but "separately" is vague — it doesn't clearly mean a different cloth. The revision introduces ambiguity where the original was precise. A good study strategy here: when editing for conciseness, always ask yourself what information is doing real work. In safety instructions especially, every specific word (clean, separate, each) is usually there for a reason — cutting it is only acceptable if the meaning survives intact.

Question 10

Before closing, the cashier counts the money in the cash drawer. The cashier records the total on the daily log. The cashier then locks the cash drawer in the safe.

Which revision best reduces repetition while keeping the original sequence and meaning?

  1. Before closing, the cashier records the total, counts the money, and locks the cash drawer in the safe.
  2. Before closing, the money is counted and recorded before the cashier places the daily log in the safe.
  3. Before closing, the cashier counts the money, records the total on the daily log, and then locks the cash drawer in the safe. (correct answer)
  4. The cashier counts the money before closing, while the daily log and cash drawer are locked together in the safe.
Explanation: When a question asks you to "reduce repetition" in a passage, your job is to combine sentences smoothly into one — without dropping any information, changing the order of events, or introducing new errors. Think of it like merging lanes on a highway: everything needs to flow in the same direction. The original passage has three clear steps in order: (1) count the money, (2) record the total on the daily log, (3) lock the cash drawer in the safe. Choice C preserves all three steps in exactly that sequence — "counts the money, records the total on the daily log, and then locks the cash drawer in the safe" — while eliminating the repetition of "the cashier" appearing in every sentence. That's the revision that works. Choice A fails because it scrambles the order, listing "records the total" before "counts the money." You can't record a total before counting — the sequence matters. Choice B introduces a factual error: it says the daily log is placed in the safe, but the original says only the cash drawer goes in the safe. It also removes the cashier as the clear subject. Choice D makes a similar factual mistake, saying the "daily log and cash drawer are locked together in the safe," which the original never states, and the phrasing "while" blurs the step-by-step sequence entirely. A useful strategy: when revising for repetition, always check three things — does the revision keep the same facts, the same order, and the same meaning? If any of those shift, the revision is wrong, no matter how clean it sounds.