Reading Comprehension
Independent English reading practice develops reconstruction of arguments, inference, stance, paragraph function and meaning in context. The passages and questions are shared-skill exercises, not a statement of the current Czech examination’s text lengths, question distribution, difficulty or marking system. Choose the answer supported by the question’s actual focus rather than merely a true sentence or a matching keyword.
What is actually being tested
- Cohesion: reference (this, such, the former), substitution and ellipsis, and lexical chains. Track what a pronoun points to before choosing.
- Stance and hedging: modals and semi-modals (may, tends to, is bound to), adverbs (largely, arguably), and concession (although, while, admittedly) signal how committed the writer is.
- Function: a sentence may illustrate, concede, qualify, or rebut. Ask what work it does, not only what it says.
- Scope: watch quantifiers (some, most, all) and negation. An option that strengthens 'some' to 'all' is wrong however plausible.
Worked example
Read this sentence: Although the committee's report acknowledged that remote work had cut commuting emissions, it cautioned that the net effect depended on home energy sources - a caveat that journalists largely dropped.
Question: What is the writer's attitude to the press coverage? A. The coverage exaggerated the emissions findings. B. The coverage omitted an important qualification. C. The writer rejects the committee's emissions estimate. D. The writer believes journalists misrepresented the report's data.
Reasoning: the main clause after although carries the writer's point; although concedes the emissions finding rather than disputing it, so C fails. Largely dropped signals omission, not distortion of data, so B is right and D overstates. A confuses what the report said with what the coverage did. The writer's target is the coverage's selectivity.
Traps that cost marks
- Matching a word in the passage to a word in an option; the correct option is usually a paraphrase.
- Confusing the view reported (the committee's) with the view endorsed (the writer's).
- Treating a concession clause as the main claim.
- Reading largely as never, or cautioned as denied.
- Choosing an answer that is true of the passage but does not answer the question's focus (attitude, function, reason).
- Ignoring the line reference: the question asks about that sentence, not the whole passage.