We are grouping together two concepts in this lesson because CLT questions with mentions of “tone” are often equally about what is traditionally called style– that is, the way the author crafts his/her writing with a consistent vocabulary and sentence structure. Both elements can be found up in a CLT tone question: a focus on the author’s attitude toward the subject alongside different ways to use language and structure the sentence in a manner consistent with the passage as a whole.
Approach Question
An author writing for a scientific journal composes the sentence below. Should he leave the sentence as it is or opt for one of the three alternatives listed in the answer choices?
The experimenters observed a positive correlation between the amount of the enzyme and the presence of the substrate.
A. NO CHANGE
B. There was to be found by the observers, so to speak, a positively oriented correlation between enzyme amount and substrate presence.
C. Those doing the experiment were overjoyed to discover a positive relationship between the enzyme’s quantity and the substrate.
D. The people in the lab saw that the enzyme and substrate seemed to go together.
If you were writing for a scientific journal, how would you want your writing to sound? It would be a good idea to sound professional without coming off as pretentious or writing with hard-to-decipher prose. Technical language would be appropriate, given your audience; while avoiding unnecessary jargon, you would be justified in using words like “correlation” to describe experimental results.
With this in mind, we can note how each of the choices departs from the original “NO CHANGE” in one direction or the other. Choice B adds the unnecessary phrase “so to speak” and needlessly expands the word “positive” to “positively oriented.” It also contains an awkward, indirect introduction which is certainly not an improvement upon the simple “the experimenters observed …”
The next answer changes the neutral, descriptive tone by including the word “overjoyed.” This expression of emotion is unlikely to be appropriate for a scientific publication and, given an alternative that sounds more detached and objective, is an inferior answer. The final choice, while it might seem to have the virtue of conciseness, relaxes the language considerably so that the sentence sounds like a casual conversation. In the right passage, this sort of language might fit, but not in the formal environment of a scientific journal. The sentence should be left as it is; the answer is NO CHANGE.
General Strategy
Identify elements of tone as well as elements of style.
Although an author’s tone can take on all sorts of nuance, we can boil down most tone questions to positive or negative connotation. Consider the difference between the following two sentences, both of which could be describing the same hike through the mountains:
The breathtaking views filled me with awe and gratitude.
The trip dragged on and the endless hills were a constant annoyance.
Style, on the other hand, is bound up in an author’s vocabulary, sentence structure, use of literal versus figurative language, and level of formality (casual versus formal). Both of the following sentences describe the same scene, but the first is descriptive and poetic while the second is concise and straightforward.
The stars glimmered like diamonds against the velvet evening sky.
It was a clear night, and the stars were visible.
Try this question now.
An author wants to convey cautious approval of Aristotle’s contributions to science. Should she leave the sentence as it is or opt for one of the three alternatives listed in the answer choices?
Aristotle’s work provided stunning breakthroughs in the field of natural philosophy.
A. NO CHANGE
B. The scientific theories propounded by Aristotle are shot through with what modern scientists would consider grave errors.
C. Though Aristotle was innovative for his time, his views of the cosmos turned out to be largely mistaken.
D. Given the technological limitations of his time, Aristotle provided helpful advances in natural philosophy.
(spoiler)
We need to carefully note two words in the question itself: "cautious’ and “approval”. With these in mind, we can rule out 1) negative answers and 2) answers that are too effusive in their praise. On the first count, we can eliminate choice B; “grave errors” implied a strong criticism. Choice C, though not as strongly negative, is still more disapproving than approving in its tone. On the second count, the original answer can be eliminated; there is nothing cautious about the phrase “stunning breakthroughs.” The remaining answer uses the more modestly positive word “helpful” and qualifies the approval with a phrase about the limitations of his time. The answer is D.
Pay attention to word choice.
The use of adjectives often conveys a positive or negative tone.
Short, simple sentences usually convey directness and neutrality.
Try this question now.
An author is seeking to convey detached objectivity on a topic. Should he leave the sentence as it is or opt for one of the three alternatives listed in the answer choices?
The history of evolutionary biology demonstrates both the promise of the field and the inherent limits of its scope.
A. NO CHANGE
B. Evolutionary biology is awesome.
C. The critics of evolutionary biology are almost always persuasive in their arguments.
D. Evolutionary biology is full of insights but evolutionary psychology is mostly bunk.
(spoiler)
To be “detached”, one must avoid strong language in either the affirming or the critical direction. With this in mind, we can quickly eliminate choice B (it is also likely too casual for an assessment of a scientific field). Choice D, also, with the phrase “mostly bunk,” is clearly not detached. Choice C is a little more cautious, but in the end, since it agrees with the critics of the discipline, is landing firmly on the negative side. This makes it less than “detached and objective.” The balanced negative/positive outlook of the original answer is best. The answer is NO CHANGE.
Analyze sentence structure.
Long, flowing sentences may be appropriate for literature passages and philosophical essays.
Ancient authors are more likely to use long sentences than are more recent authors; follow the author’s style carefully.
Try this one now.
An author is editing a sentence to be found in a work of literary fiction. Should she leave the sentence as it is or opt for one of the three alternatives listed in the answer choices?
The young heiress had it all.
A. NO CHANGE
B. The life of the young heiress was gilded with privilege.
C. The young heiress had inherited an estate including several hundred acres of land and scores of horses.
D. I wish I could have had the life of this young heiress.
(spoiler)
In works of literature, we can expect to find figurative language. Choice C, by contrast, sounds more like a factual report of the heiress’ inheritance; though it is not impossible that such a sentence would be found in a work of fiction, we should look for something more poetic in style. The expression that she “had it all” sounds very modern and not particularly expressive, so we can rule out NO CHANGE. And unless there is a strong suggestion that the author is generally writing in the first person, we should discard choices that insert the author using “I” language, such as choice D. The phrase “gilded with privilege” is figurative, since the heiress’ life does not literally contain decoration somehow made out of privilege. This language is the most likely to be included in a CLT literature passage. The answer is B.
As always, context is king.
Trace how the author treats his/her subject; is the overall attitude approving, critical, or neutral?
Keep track of how much the author uses words unfamiliar to you as well as complicated phrasing. The writing on CLT passages tends to be consistent in style and tone.
Sign up for free to take 5 quiz questions on this topic
