ACT English: Conciseness and Redundancy (Drill 3)

Question 1. Which choice is most concise and avoids redundancy?

• A) No Change (at this point in time)
• B) at the present moment in time currently
• C) as of now at this current time
• D) currently ✓

Explanation: Choice D is correct. "At this point in time" is a well-known wordy filler phrase; it uses five words to say what "currently" or "now" says in one. "Researchers are currently unable to explain..." is clean and direct. Choice A keeps the five-word phrase. Choice B ("at the present moment in time currently") is longer than the original and stacks multiple time references redundantly. Choice C ("as of now at this current time") is also longer and redundant. Whenever you see "at this point in time," "at this present moment," or "currently existing," treat them as red flags for wordiness and look for the single-word replacement.

Question 2. Which choice is most concise and avoids redundancy?

• A) No Change (was originally released for the first time)
• B) was released ✓
• C) had been released originally for the first time ever
• D) made its first and original debut release

Explanation: Choice B is correct. The sentence already establishes "first published in 1851" in the opening phrase, so "originally," "released," and "for the first time" in the underlined portion are all redundant with information the reader already has. "Was released" is sufficient; the "first published" clause has already told us this was the initial release. Choice A stacks "originally" and "for the first time" on top of the already-stated "first published." Choice C adds "ever" on top of an already-redundant phrase. Choice D strings together "first," "original," and "debut", three words that all mean the same thing in this context. Watch for information earlier in the sentence that makes later words unnecessary.

Question 3. Which choice is most concise and avoids redundancy?

• A) No Change (collecting footage and conducting interviews) ✓
• B) doing documentary work
• C) collecting footage, shooting video, and conducting interviews
• D) gathering and collecting all of the necessary footage

Explanation: Choice A (No Change) is correct. "Collecting footage" and "conducting interviews" are two distinct activities; they are not synonyms or repetitions of each other. The phrase is already concise and informative. Cutting either activity would remove meaningful content. Choice B replaces two specific activities with the vague phrase "doing documentary work," losing the precision of what the crew was actually doing. Choice C adds "shooting video," which is redundant with "collecting footage", a genuine redundancy introduced by the wrong answer. Choice D reduces the phrase to only footage collection and adds "gathering and collecting" (redundant with each other) and "all of the necessary" (empty filler). The lesson: two different activities joined by "and" are not automatically redundant.

Question 4. Which choice is most concise and avoids redundancy?

• A) No Change (was written by Dr. Patel, who was the one who wrote it,)
• B) was authored and written by Dr. Patel,
• C) was written by Dr. Patel, ✓
• D) was composed and put together by Dr. Patel, the report's author,

Explanation: Choice C is correct. The original underlined phrase commits one of the most blatant forms of redundancy; it says the same thing twice in different words: "was written by Dr. Patel, who was the one who wrote it." The clause "who was the one who wrote it" repeats exactly what "was written by Dr. Patel" already said. Cutting it gives the clean: "The report was written by Dr. Patel and submitted to the board last Tuesday." Choice A keeps the self-repeating clause. Choice B replaces "written" with "authored and written", "authored" and "written" are synonyms, creating a new redundancy. Choice D uses "composed and put together" (another redundant pair) and adds "the report's author" (which is also already implied by "was composed by").

Question 5. Which choice is most concise and avoids redundancy?

• A) No Change (and upon their arrival at the top of the mountain they were there at the summit,)
• B) DELETE the underlined portion (connecting "dawn" directly to "they were rewarded") ✓
• C) and when they arrived there at the top,
• D) and upon arriving at the summit location at the top,

Explanation: Choice B is correct. The entire underlined clause is redundant with information the sentence already contains. The sentence opens by saying the hikers "reached the summit", so their presence at the top is already established. The underlined portion ("upon their arrival at the top of the mountain they were there at the summit") repeats this fact in a wordy, redundant way. Deleting it entirely gives: "The hikers reached the summit just after dawn and were rewarded with a breathtaking view", clean, logical, and complete. Choice A keeps the redundant clause. Choice C shortens the clause but still repeats the arrival information ("when they arrived there at the top"). Choice D also retains the redundant arrival idea and adds "location at the top," another redundancy.