Spanish 3 Quiz: Inferring Attitude And Intention
10 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Inferring Attitude And IntentionQuestion 1 of 10

Escucha el siguiente intercambio entre dos colegas de trabajo:

Marta: —Oye, ¿ya terminaste el informe que te pedí la semana pasada? Carlos: —Sí, claro… lo tengo casi listo. Solo me faltan unos pequeños detalles. Marta: —¿Casi listo? Te lo pedí hace siete días, Carlos. Carlos: —Ya sé, ya sé. Es que he tenido muchísimo trabajo con los otros proyectos. Pero te lo entrego hoy sin falta. Marta: —Eso espero.

Based on the tone and context of the exchange, what is Marta's most likely attitude toward Carlos's explanation?

She is genuinely sympathetic about his workload and willing to extend the deadline without reservations.
She is skeptical of his excuse and doubtful that he will actually deliver the report as promised.
She is indifferent to whether the report is finished and is simply going through the motions of asking.
She is satisfied with his progress and confident the remaining details will be resolved quickly.
← Back to quizzes

Spanish 3 Quiz

Spanish 3 Quiz: Inferring Attitude And Intention

Practice Inferring Attitude And Intention in Spanish 3 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 Inferring Attitude And Intention, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Spanish 3.

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

Escucha el siguiente intercambio entre dos colegas de trabajo:

Marta: —Oye, ¿ya terminaste el informe que te pedí la semana pasada? Carlos: —Sí, claro… lo tengo casi listo. Solo me faltan unos pequeños detalles. Marta: —¿Casi listo? Te lo pedí hace siete días, Carlos. Carlos: —Ya sé, ya sé. Es que he tenido muchísimo trabajo con los otros proyectos. Pero te lo entrego hoy sin falta. Marta: —Eso espero.

Based on the tone and context of the exchange, what is Marta's most likely attitude toward Carlos's explanation?

  1. She is genuinely sympathetic about his workload and willing to extend the deadline without reservations.
  2. She is skeptical of his excuse and doubtful that he will actually deliver the report as promised. (correct answer)
  3. She is indifferent to whether the report is finished and is simply going through the motions of asking.
  4. She is satisfied with his progress and confident the remaining details will be resolved quickly.
Explanation: When reading a dialogue for tone and attitude, focus on what characters say, how they say it, and what remains implied but unspoken. Spanish exchanges often carry meaning through brief, clipped responses just as much as through long explanations. Marta's language signals clear frustration throughout. She repeats "¿Casi listo?" as a question to highlight her disbelief — echoing someone's words back is a classic marker of skepticism or exasperation in Spanish conversation. Her reminder that she asked "hace siete días" isn't just informational; it's an implicit accusation. Then her closing line, "Eso espero," is the most telling detail. This short phrase — literally "That's what I hope" — is characteristically guarded and doubtful in tone. She isn't saying she believes him; she's saying she hopes he follows through, implying she's not convinced he will. This confirms that B is correct: Marta is skeptical of Carlos's excuse and doubtful he'll deliver. A is wrong because Marta shows no warmth or flexibility — she doesn't offer more time or express any understanding of his situation. C is wrong because indifference would look like a neutral, disengaged response, not the pointed follow-up questions and deadline reminder we see here. D is wrong because satisfaction would be expressed positively, not through short, tense replies like "Eso espero." A useful strategy: when a Spanish dialogue question asks about attitude, treat brief or ambiguous closing remarks — like "Eso espero" or "Ya veremos" — as emotional climaxes. They often reveal more than longer statements do.

Question 2

Escucha la siguiente conversación telefónica:

Abuela: —Hijito, ¿cuándo vas a venir a visitarme? Ya hace tres meses que no te veo. Nieto: —Abuela, es que el trabajo está muy pesado últimamente. Pero voy a intentar ir pronto. Abuela: —Sí, sí… siempre lo mismo. 'Pronto', 'cuando pueda'… Bueno, no te preocupes, yo aquí estaré. Nieto: —Te lo prometo, abuela. Este mes voy. Abuela: —Como tú digas, mi amor.

What does the grandmother's use of phrases like 'Sí, sí… siempre lo mismo' and 'Como tú digas, mi amor' most likely reveal about her intention in this conversation?

  1. She intends to express unconditional acceptance and genuine understanding of her grandson's busy schedule.
  2. She intends to guilt her grandson indirectly by feigning resignation, thereby pressuring him to follow through on his promise. (correct answer)
  3. She intends to end the conversation quickly because she is genuinely unbothered by the infrequent visits.
  4. She intends to encourage her grandson sincerely, using affectionate language to motivate him without any underlying reproach.
Explanation: When analyzing dialogue in Spanish, pay close attention to tone and subtext — what a speaker implies rather than states directly. This question tests your ability to read between the lines of conversational Spanish, recognizing sarcasm, passive pressure, and indirect emotional communication. The grandmother's phrases are the key. "Sí, sí… siempre lo mismo" (Yes, yes… always the same thing) signals exasperated resignation — she's heard these promises before and doesn't believe them. "Como tú digas, mi amor" (Whatever you say, my love) sounds sweet on the surface, but paired with context, it's dismissive in a loaded way. Together, these phrases perform a classic guilt-trip strategy: she pretends to accept the situation while clearly communicating disappointment, which puts pressure on the grandson to prove her wrong. That makes B the correct answer — she's feigning resignation to indirectly pressure him into following through. A is wrong because her tone is clearly not one of genuine understanding. True acceptance wouldn't include exasperated phrases like "siempre lo mismo." C fails because the grandmother is obviously not unbothered — her word choices drip with suppressed frustration, not indifference. D is the trickiest distractor: the affectionate language ("mi amor") might fool you into thinking she's being purely supportive, but "Como tú digas" in this context is dismissive sarcasm, not sincere encouragement. Study tip: In Spanish dialogue questions, watch for affectionate vocabulary used ironically. Terms of endearment paired with resigned or repetitive phrases often signal indirect emotional pressure — a common feature of family dynamics in Spanish-language texts.

Question 3

Escucha el siguiente diálogo entre una madre y su hijo adulto:

Madre: —¿Ya hablaste con tu tía sobre las vacaciones de Navidad? Hijo: —Todavía no, mamá. Madre: —Ah. Es que ella me preguntó si ibas a ir, y yo no supe qué decirle. Hijo: —Ya le voy a escribir. Madre: —Sí, claro, cuando tengas tiempo. No hay prisa. Ella solo lleva semanas esperando respuesta. Hijo: —Mamá… Madre: —No, no, está bien. Tú tienes tu vida.

The mother's final two lines — 'No hay prisa. Ella solo lleva semanas esperando respuesta' and 'Tú tienes tu vida' — are best understood as expressions of which of the following?

  1. Genuine reassurance that she understands her son's busy life and does not want to pressure him into contacting the aunt.
  2. Frustration directed at the aunt rather than at the son, since the mother is irritated by the aunt's persistent inquiries.
  3. Sarcastic reproach delivered through apparent concession, intended to make the son feel guilty about his neglect. (correct answer)
  4. A sincere attempt to de-escalate a conflict by acknowledging the son's autonomy and withdrawing the request entirely.
Explanation: When interpreting dialogue in Spanish (or any language), pay close attention to tone shifts and contradictions between words and meaning — this is the heart of verbal irony and sarcasm. When a character's words seem accommodating but the surrounding context signals frustration, you're almost certainly looking at sarcastic reproach. Here, the mother's line "No hay prisa" (There's no rush) directly contradicts her immediately following detail: "Ella solo lleva semanas esperando respuesta" (She's only been waiting weeks for a response). The word "solo" (only) is doing heavy ironic lifting — weeks of waiting is, in fact, a long time. The mother is feigning nonchalance while highlighting exactly what makes the son's behavior inconsiderate. Then "Tú tienes tu vida" (You have your life) sounds like understanding on the surface, but delivered after this buildup, it functions as a guilt-inducing dismissal. This pattern — apparent concession that actually sharpens the criticism — is the hallmark of sarcastic reproach, making C the correct answer. A is the most tempting trap. The words themselves could suggest genuine understanding, but the dramatic contrast between "no rush" and "weeks of waiting" signals the opposite of sincerity. B misreads the target of the emotion entirely — the mother's frustration is clearly directed at the son's procrastination, not at the aunt's persistence. D fails because the mother isn't genuinely withdrawing her request; she's escalating emotional pressure through guilt, not de-escalating conflict. As a strategy, when you see dialogue where a character's words and context contradict each other, ask yourself: whose behavior is actually being criticized here, and how? Sarcasm often hides criticism inside apparent agreement.

Question 4

Escucha la siguiente conversación entre dos estudiantes universitarios:

Diego: —¿Cómo te fue en el examen de Literatura? Paula: —Bien, bien… creo. Diego: —¿Crees? ¿No sabes si te fue bien? Paula: —Es que… no sé. Respondí todo, pero el profesor siempre sorprende con las notas. A veces uno cree que lo hizo perfecto y luego… ya sabes. Diego: —Pero tú estudiaste mucho, ¿no? Paula: —Sí, bastante. Pero con él nunca se sabe.

Which of the following best describes the attitude Paula conveys in this exchange, and what contextual clue most directly supports that interpretation?

  1. Overconfidence masked by false modesty; she repeatedly emphasizes how much she studied, suggesting she expects a high grade.
  2. Regret over insufficient preparation; her hedging language implies she did not study as thoroughly as she claims.
  3. General academic apathy; her vague answers and hedging language indicate she is not particularly invested in the outcome.
  4. Anxious uncertainty rooted specifically in distrust of the professor's grading, not in doubt about her own performance or preparation. (correct answer)
Explanation: When analyzing a character's attitude in a listening or reading passage, your job is to distinguish what someone feels from why they feel it — the source of the emotion matters just as much as the emotion itself. Paula's language throughout this exchange is full of hedging: "creo," "no sé," "nunca se sabe." These signal genuine uncertainty. But notice where she places the blame for that uncertainty — not on herself. She explicitly says she studied "bastante" and responded to every question. Her doubt isn't about her preparation; it's directed outward, toward the professor: "el profesor siempre sorprende con las notas" and "con él nunca se sabe." This makes D the correct answer — her anxiety is specifically rooted in distrust of the professor's unpredictable grading, not in any personal academic shortcoming. A is tempting because Paula does mention studying hard, but she never boasts or implies she expects a perfect grade. There's no false modesty here — she's genuinely nervous. B misreads the hedging language entirely; Paula's uncertainty isn't about how much she studied (she confirms she studied a lot), but about the professor's behavior. C would require Paula to show indifference, but her anxiety throughout the conversation proves she cares deeply about the outcome — vague answers alone don't equal apathy. A useful strategy: when a passage contains hedging language, always ask what the speaker is uncertain about and why. In Spanish, expressions like "nunca se sabe" or "con él" often signal that blame or doubt is being externalized — a key distinction in attitude questions.

Question 5

Escucha el siguiente fragmento de una conversación entre dos colegas después de una presentación:

Ricardo: —¿Qué te pareció mi presentación? Verónica: —Estuvo muy completa. Claramente pusiste mucho esfuerzo. Ricardo: —¿Pero…? Verónica: —No hay ningún 'pero'. Fue muy detallada. Ricardo: —Verónica, te conozco. ¿Qué no te gustó? Verónica: —Bueno… a veces menos es más, ¿no? Pero en serio, el contenido estaba todo ahí.

What does Verónica's conversational behavior throughout this exchange most likely reveal about her true assessment of Ricardo's presentation?

  1. She found the presentation excellent overall and is simply deflecting Ricardo's fishing for compliments by offering measured praise.
  2. She found the presentation overly long or cluttered and is reluctant to say so directly, only admitting a mild criticism when pressed. (correct answer)
  3. She found the presentation too brief and underdeveloped, and her comment 'a veces menos es más' is meant to encourage him to add more content.
  4. She has no real opinion on the presentation and is generating vague, generically positive remarks simply to be polite, without any specific criticism in mind.
Explanation: When analyzing a conversation like this one, you're being tested on pragmatics — the ability to read what someone means beyond what they literally say. In Spanish (as in English), people often soften criticism through indirect language, hesitation, and carefully chosen compliments. Pay close attention to what a speaker avoids saying directly. Verónica's behavior follows a clear pattern: she praises the presentation using words that subtly signal excess — "muy completa," "muy detallada," "el contenido estaba todo ahí." These aren't glowing reviews; they describe quantity, not quality. When Ricardo pushes her, she resists, then finally gives herself away with "a veces menos es más" — a Spanish proverb meaning "sometimes less is more." That phrase directly implies the presentation was too much of something, almost certainly too long or overly cluttered. This makes B the correct answer: she found it excessive and was reluctant to say so, only admitting a mild criticism when pressed. A is tempting but wrong — Verónica isn't simply deflecting flattery-fishing. Her word choices carry embedded criticism, not pure praise. C misreads the proverb entirely. "Menos es más" doesn't encourage adding content; it suggests there was already too much. If she wanted more development, she would say something like "le faltó profundidad." D is incorrect because her comments are too specifically chosen to be random filler — vague politeness doesn't produce precise idioms like "menos es más." Your strategy here: when a speaker uses compliments that describe quantity rather than quality, treat it as a red flag for hidden criticism. Idioms like "menos es más" are especially important — they often carry the real message.

Question 6

Escucha el siguiente fragmento de una conversación entre dos amigas:

Luisa: —¿Viste el vestido que llevaba Ana en la fiesta? Sofía: —Sí, lo vi. Muy… interesante. Luisa: —¿Interesante? ¿Eso es todo lo que dices? Sofía: —Bueno, Ana siempre tiene un estilo muy… propio. Hay que reconocérselo.

In this exchange, Sofía's use of the word 'interesante' and the phrase 'un estilo muy… propio' most likely signals which of the following attitudes?

  1. Genuine admiration for Ana's unique and bold fashion sense, expressed through understated praise.
  2. Veiled criticism of Ana's outfit, using socially safe, ambiguous language to avoid direct confrontation. (correct answer)
  3. Complete neutrality and a deliberate effort to avoid forming any personal opinion about Ana's appearance.
  4. Enthusiastic agreement with Luisa's implied disapproval, offered openly and without any attempt at diplomatic restraint.
Explanation: When analyzing dialogue in Spanish — especially on listening comprehension questions — pay close attention to what characters don't say directly. Native speakers frequently use vague or overly polite language to express negative opinions without causing social conflict. This is a key pragmatic skill tested in Spanish 3. In this exchange, Sofía's word choices are carefully non-committal. "Interesante" is a classic placeholder word in Spanish (and many cultures) used when the speaker wants to avoid saying something negative outright. Notice that Luisa immediately picks up on this — her follow-up "¿Eso es todo lo que dices?" signals that she recognizes Sofía is holding back. Then Sofía adds "un estilo muy… propio," meaning Ana has a style that is very her own — again, technically neutral but carrying an implied "…whether that's a good thing or not." The ellipses in the text (those pauses represented by "…") further signal hesitation and careful word choice. Together, these clues confirm that B is correct: Sofía is using socially safe, ambiguous language to express veiled criticism. A is wrong because genuine admiration would use clearly positive vocabulary — words like hermoso, elegante, or original in an enthusiastic tone, not hedging language with dramatic pauses. C is wrong because complete neutrality wouldn't involve the strategic word selection Sofía displays — her pauses reveal she has an opinion. D is wrong because Sofía never agrees openly or enthusiastically; her whole approach is diplomatic evasion, not candid disapproval. When you see ellipses and vague adjectives like interesante or especial in dialogue, treat them as red flags for implied criticism — it's a very common pattern on Spanish listening and reading questions.

Question 7

Escucha la siguiente conversación en una reunión de trabajo:

Directora: —Quiero escuchar ideas para el nuevo proyecto. Todas las opiniones son bienvenidas. Empleado (Tomás): —Bueno, yo pensaba que podríamos enfocarnos en el mercado local antes de expandirnos. Directora: —Mmm… es una opción. ¿Alguien más tiene alguna otra propuesta? Tomás: —¿Le parece mal mi idea, directora? Directora: —No, no… para nada. Es solo que me gusta escuchar varias perspectivas antes de decidir.

Which inference about the director's attitude toward Tomás's suggestion is best supported by her tone and behavior in this exchange?

  1. She finds the idea genuinely promising but wants to gather more options as a standard procedural step before committing.
  2. She strongly disagrees with the idea on strategic grounds and uses procedural language to signal that it will not receive serious consideration.
  3. She is confused by the idea and redirects the conversation because she needs the group to help clarify what a local-market focus would actually involve.
  4. She is unimpressed by the idea and quickly moves past it, though she avoids saying so directly to prevent discouraging Tomás. (correct answer)
Explanation: When analyzing tone and implied attitude in a conversation, pay close attention to what a speaker does rather than just what they say — especially when someone avoids direct confrontation. This passage tests your ability to read between the lines of polite, professional Spanish dialogue. The director's behavior reveals subtle disengagement with Tomás's idea. She responds with "Mmm… es una opción" — a lukewarm, non-committal phrase — and immediately pivots to ask if anyone else has a proposal. This pivot is the key signal: she doesn't develop, question, or praise the idea; she moves away from it. When Tomás directly asks if she dislikes it, she denies this and frames her behavior as procedural ("me gusta escuchar varias perspectivas"). This denial is diplomatic, not necessarily truthful — a classic face-saving move to avoid discouraging an employee. Together, these clues point to D as the best-supported inference. Answer A is too generous — it assumes her interest is genuine and her process neutral, but the "Mmm" and quick redirect suggest the opposite of enthusiasm. B goes too far in the other direction; nothing in her language signals strong strategic disagreement — she's clearly softening her reaction, not signaling rejection. C introduces confusion that simply isn't present; the director never asks for clarification or indicates she misunderstood the concept of a local-market focus. A useful strategy: when a speaker quickly moves past someone's contribution and uses vague affirmations like "es una opción," that's often a soft dismissal in disguise. Train yourself to notice what isn't said — genuine interest usually comes with follow-up questions or elaboration.

Question 8

Escucha el siguiente intercambio entre vecinos:

Don Aurelio: —Buenos días. Noto que anoche hubo una fiesta bastante animada en su apartamento. Joven vecino: —Ah, sí, perdone. Fue el cumpleaños de mi hermano. No fue tan tarde, ¿verdad? Don Aurelio: —Bueno… terminó a las dos de la mañana. Pero no importa, yo ya estoy acostumbrado. Joven vecino: —¿Seguro? No queremos molestar. Don Aurelio: —Sí, sí, tranquilo. Uno cuando es joven también hace esas cosas.

What is Don Aurelio's most likely underlying intention when he says 'No importa, yo ya estoy acostumbrado' and 'Uno cuando es joven también hace esas cosas'?

  1. He is sincerely forgiving the neighbor and sharing a personal memory to establish genuine intergenerational solidarity.
  2. He is completely indifferent to the noise and initiates the conversation only out of a general desire for social interaction.
  3. He is politely but unmistakably communicating his displeasure and implicitly requesting that the neighbor be more considerate in the future. (correct answer)
  4. He is threatening to escalate the complaint to building management if the behavior continues, using indirect language to soften the warning.
Explanation: When analyzing dialogue in Spanish, pay close attention to indirect communication — what a speaker implies rather than states outright. Spanish conversation, especially between neighbors or acquaintances, often uses polite softening language to express displeasure without creating open conflict. This is exactly what's being tested here. Don Aurelio's word choices reveal his true intention layer by layer. He opens by casually noting the party — an unmistakably pointed observation. Then, "terminó a las dos de la mañana" is a precise detail that no truly indifferent person would bother mentioning. His follow-up phrases "no importa" and "estoy acostumbrado" are classic examples of resignación cortés — polite resignation that signals repeated tolerance, not genuine forgiveness. Finally, "uno cuando es joven también hace esas cosas" sounds nostalgic but functions as a gentle reminder that adult consideration is now expected. Taken together, these statements form a clear, indirect request for better behavior. C is correct. A is tempting because the tone sounds warm, but genuine forgiveness wouldn't require the precision of "a las dos de la mañana" or the resigned "ya estoy acostumbrado" — that ya signals accumulated frustration, not goodwill. B is contradicted by the entire structure of the conversation: Don Aurelio raises a specific grievance immediately, which is not the behavior of someone making small talk. D goes far beyond what the dialogue supports — there is no implied threat of escalation anywhere in his words. Your strategy: when a Spanish speaker says something sounds fine but includes precise grievance details, treat those details as the real message. Indirect complaint is a recurring theme in Spanish pragmatics questions.

Question 9

Escucha el siguiente intercambio entre un jefe y su empleada:

Jefa: —Elena, he notado que llegas un poco tarde últimamente. Elena: —Sí, lo siento mucho. Es que el tráfico en mi zona ha sido terrible estas semanas. Jefa: —Sí, entiendo. El tráfico puede ser muy impredecible. Elena: —Exacto. Pero estoy buscando soluciones. Jefa: —Bien. Porque la puntualidad es algo que tomamos muy en serio aquí, como sabes.

Which of the following best captures the dual function of the jefa's final statement, 'la puntualidad es algo que tomamos muy en serio aquí, como sabes'?

  1. It functions simultaneously as a formal warning and a face-saving device, restating a known rule to pressure Elena while avoiding a direct personal accusation. (correct answer)
  2. It serves purely as an informational reminder about company policy, with no implied personal consequence for Elena specifically.
  3. It is an apology for raising the issue, signaling that the jefa regrets having mentioned the tardiness and wants to close the topic positively.
  4. It signals that the jefa has accepted Elena's explanation fully and is moving on by reaffirming general values rather than pursuing the matter further.
Explanation: When analyzing dialogue in Spanish (or any language), you need to think beyond the literal content of words and ask: what is this statement doing socially and pragmatically? The jefa's final line works on two levels simultaneously — this is the key insight the question is testing. The phrase "la puntualidad es algo que tomamos muy en serio aquí, como sabes" is framed as a general, impersonal statement about company policy rather than a direct accusation like "tú eres impuntual y eso es un problema." This phrasing is deliberate. By invoking a shared, known rule ("como sabes" — as you know), the jefa applies pressure and implicitly warns Elena without attacking her personally. That two-layered move — pressure plus face-saving — is exactly what A describes, making it the correct answer. B is wrong because calling it "purely informational with no implied personal consequence" ignores the obvious context: Elena has just been told she arrives late. The timing of this statement makes the personal implication unavoidable. C is wrong because nothing in the jefa's tone suggests regret or apology — she is reinforcing her point, not retreating from it. D is tempting but incorrect; the jefa is not dropping the matter. The statement functions as a final, firm signal that this conversation has real stakes, not a polite wrap-up. A useful strategy: when a question asks about the "dual function" or "implied meaning" of a statement, look for the gap between what is literally said and what is socially accomplished. Indirect language often carries more weight than direct language in professional dialogue.

Question 10

Escucha la siguiente conversación entre dos amigos que hablan sobre un tercero:

Andrés: —¿Invitaste a Marcos a la cena del sábado? Claudia: —Mmm… es que no sé si va a poder. Tiene mucho trabajo últimamente. Andrés: —¿Lo invitaste o no? Claudia: —No exactamente. Pensé que a lo mejor prefería descansar. Andrés: —Claudia, simplemente dime si quieres invitarlo o no. Claudia: —Mira, Andrés, Marcos y yo… las cosas están un poco raras entre nosotros últimamente. Eso es todo.

Throughout the conversation, Claudia's evolving responses most likely reveal which of the following about her true intention?

  1. She deliberately avoided inviting Marcos due to personal tension between them and initially concealed this by attributing the omission to his presumed schedule. (correct answer)
  2. She genuinely believes Marcos is too busy to attend and is trying to spare him the pressure of having to decline an invitation.
  3. She forgot to invite Marcos and is constructing a retroactive justification to avoid admitting her oversight to Andrés.
  4. She wants Andrés to invite Marcos on her behalf so that she can attend the dinner without having to interact with him directly.
Explanation: When analyzing a conversation for implied meaning and evolving intent, pay attention to how a speaker's explanations shift under pressure — each revision tells you something about what they were hiding before. Claudia's responses follow a revealing pattern. She first deflects with a practical excuse ("he has a lot of work lately"), then softens it further ("I thought he might prefer to rest"), and only when Andrés pushes a third time does she admit the real reason: things between her and Marcos are "a little strange." This progression — from logistical excuse → presumed preference → personal tension — is the signature of someone gradually being cornered into honesty. A is correct because it captures both parts of her true intention: she deliberately avoided inviting Marcos, and she initially concealed this by framing the omission around his schedule rather than their relationship. B fails because Claudia never actually invites Marcos at all — if she genuinely wanted to spare him pressure, she would have at least extended the invitation. Her concern isn't for him; it's about avoiding awkwardness. C is wrong because her explanations are too layered and purposeful to suggest a simple forgotten invitation — she has reasons ready, not apologies. D misreads the ending entirely; Claudia admits the tension between them, not a desire for Andrés to act as a social intermediary. A useful strategy: when a conversation question tracks multiple exchanges, map how the speaker's story changes. Each revision under questioning usually moves closer to the truth — the final admission is almost always the key.