How does this error actually change your message?
ETS describes Writing as an assessment of written communication that includes organization of ideas and grammatical accuracy. For our diagnosis, start with what a reader might understand. Some errors remain local; others may change who is responsible for an action or make a request unclear.
Take a sentence from your draft and restate its meaning in French. If you have to mentally add a missing actor, cause, or condition, mark that part. This restatement is not meant to lead to a word-for-word translation of your entire response. It checks whether your intent is actually present in your written English, rather than only in your mind.
Does each statement have a complete structure?
Start with sentence boundaries. A phrase introduced by “because” gives a reason and normally depends on a main clause. In a continuous passage, a period placed just before it may leave a fragment. Find the statement that the reason belongs to, then join the two or rephrase them.
Conversely, several complete clauses joined by a comma can make the meaning hard to follow. Separate them or express their relationship with a construction you know. The goal is not to shorten every sentence: a complex sentence is useful when its dependencies are clear. After making a change, also reread the sentence before and after it to check the flow.
Does each pronoun refer to only one person or object?
Circle pronouns that refer back to a noun: “they,” “them,” “it,” and “this.” Trace each one back to its referent. If two plural groups could fit, repeating a noun may be clearer than varying your vocabulary. A sentence can be grammatically possible and still be hard to interpret.
Also examine passive constructions. They work when the result matters more than the person doing the action, but they can hide an important responsibility. “The forms will be checked” may be enough to give information; if you are asking someone to check them, name that person or make a direct request. Grammar should serve the communication, not just help you avoid repetition.
Does the sentence preserve the logic you intended?
Check time references together. A problem that occurred yesterday may have a present consequence, so the verbs do not all need to use the same tense. Ask what is over, still true, or only being considered. Automatically changing every verb to the past can turn a current request into a closed account.
Then check negatives, conditions, and restrictions. “Unless,” “only,” or “not” can change the scope of a sentence with very few words. Finally, replace each linking word in your mind with the relationship it expresses: cause, contrast, or result. If “therefore” introduces a conclusion that the previous sentence does not support, choosing a more elegant synonym will not solve the problem.
What needs to be fixed in this message about printers?
This teaching exercise states the intended meaning so you do not have to guess what the pronouns refer to. Identify the parts that make the message hard to understand, then revise them. The goal is not to make every sentence more sophisticated; keep the necessary information.
Intended meaning: Two printers have stopped working. Technicians will repair them, but the repair will take several days. The students want the department to lend them two spare printers until Friday. Draft: “After the printers stopped working, the assistants told the students that they should replace them. Because the repair will take several days. We ask if can the department lend us two machines until Friday.” Revise the draft to express the intended meaning clearly.
Enter your answer before viewing the review.
The solution, step by step
One possible revision: “Two printers have stopped working. The technicians will repair them, but the repair will take several days. Could the department lend us two spare printers until Friday?”
The method in action
- “They should replace them” clearly identifies neither the actor nor the action that matches the intended meaning. The revision names the technicians and uses “repair” instead of “replace.” Correcting subject–verb agreement alone would not have been enough; the draft needed to say what was intended.
- “Because the repair will take several days” remains a fragment in this draft. The suggested version connects the duration to the repair using “but,” which makes the difficulty clear despite the planned solution. Another option would be a complete main clause followed by this reason.
- “If can the department” incorrectly reverses the subject and auxiliary in an indirect question. One option is “We would like to know if the department can lend us…”. The revision uses a more concise direct request with “Could…?”
- In your notes, separate three causes: an ambiguous reference, a standalone dependent clause, and indirect question word order. This diagnosis gives you three focused areas to practice instead of the vague instruction to “review grammar.”
The pitfall
Counting errors without considering their effect
A total count mixes a typo, an ambiguous pronoun, and a missing request. It does not tell you what to work on. For each correction, note the reader’s first possible interpretation, your intended meaning, and the change you made. When these three points are clear, it becomes easier to reuse the rule.
Keep sentences that are already correct. Rewriting them all during editing adds work and may introduce new problems. Our prioritization helps you choose an action; it assigns no official weight to errors and cannot predict a TOEFL score.
Key takeaways
- Diagnose the effect on meaning before counting errors.
- Check that each sentence is complete and each pronoun has a clear referent.
- Preserve relationships of time, cause, condition, and negation.
- Turn each problem you identify into focused practice in your notes.