Choose the one option that correctly completes each cleft sentence.
1It was only after the raw data had been independently replicated ............... the team withdrew its original conclusion.
Wrong!
The temporal focus follows the cleft frame it was ... "that"; when would belong to a non-cleft temporal clause.
2It was the limitations of the sampling method ............... the authors conceded they had disclosed too late for the reviewers to reassess the findings.
Wrong!
The object extracted from disclosed is linked to the cleft focus by "that"; where cannot refer to limitations or fill the object gap.
3It is because the exemption was never formally recorded, not because the file has since been misplaced, ............... the compliance team cannot verify who authorised it.
Wrong!
A focused reason introduced by because is followed by the cleft linker "that", not why.
4It was the legal advisers, not the ministers themselves, ............... the committee acknowledged had warned that the draft clause might be unenforceable.
Wrong!
The pronoun is the subject of had warned within the embedded clause, so the subject form "who" is required.
5............... the dissenting members objected to was not the timetable but the absence of independent oversight.
Wrong!
The fused relative "What" means the thing that and requires no stated antecedent.
6Preventing retrospective changes to the data was ............... the panel insisted on a locked archive.
Wrong!
The reversed reason-focused construction requires "why" to introduce the reason the panel insisted on a locked archive.
7............... the agency intends to reconcile the two mutually incompatible reporting systems is still unclear; its proposal specifies the deadline but no procedure.
Wrong!
The missing information concerns the procedure, signalled by no procedure, so "How" is required.
8............... the two models diverge most sharply is in their treatment of temporal uncertainty.
Wrong!
The clause identifies the area in which the models differ, so "Where" matches the complement in their treatment of temporal uncertainty.
9What the report does not explain is ............... once the pilot was expanded beyond the original two sites.
Wrong!
After is, the embedded interrogative takes statement word order: "why the projected savings failed to materialise".
10It was not until the auditors compared the original timestamps with the archived metadata ............... that several entries had been altered retrospectively.
Wrong!
The it-cleft requires "that they realised"; inversion would occur in the different structure Not until ... did they realise.
11I still cannot understand why it was that ............... to publish the unredacted version, despite legal advice to the contrary.
Wrong!
Within why it was that, the cleft clause retains statement order, so "the committee decided" is correct.
12It is the unresolved discrepancies, rather than the revised forecast, that ............... the auditors from endorsing the accounts.
Wrong!
The relative clause refers to the plural cleft focus unresolved discrepancies, so "are preventing" is required despite the intervening singular noun.
Exercise complete
0 out of 12
correct answers
Answers
- It was only after the raw data had been independently replicated that the team withdrew its original conclusion.
- It was the limitations of the sampling method that the authors conceded they had disclosed too late for the reviewers to reassess the findings.
- It is because the exemption was never formally recorded, not because the file has since been misplaced, that the compliance team cannot verify who authorised it.
- It was the legal advisers, not the ministers themselves, who the committee acknowledged had warned that the draft clause might be unenforceable.
- What the dissenting members objected to was not the timetable but the absence of independent oversight.
- Preventing retrospective changes to the data was why the panel insisted on a locked archive.
- How the agency intends to reconcile the two mutually incompatible reporting systems is still unclear; its proposal specifies the deadline but no procedure.
- Where the two models diverge most sharply is in their treatment of temporal uncertainty.
- What the report does not explain is why the projected savings failed to materialise once the pilot was expanded beyond the original two sites.
- It was not until the auditors compared the original timestamps with the archived metadata that they realised that several entries had been altered retrospectively.
- I still cannot understand why it was that the committee decided to publish the unredacted version, despite legal advice to the contrary.
- It is the unresolved discrepancies, rather than the revised forecast, that are preventing the auditors from endorsing the accounts.