1Question
After the professor summarized the lecture in plain language, even the most confused students felt more <u>clarified</u> about the topic.
2Question
The committee's <u>consensus</u> was to postpone the vote, which meant that most members agreed on the delay.
3Question
Because the writer kept repeating the same point, the editor found the paragraph <u>redundant</u> and suggested cutting it.
4Question
Her explanation was so <u>concise</u> that it covered all the key ideas in just two sentences.
5Question
The witness gave an <u>ambiguous</u> answer, saying the man was 'near the store,' which could mean many different things.
6Question
The data from the survey seemed <u>credible</u> because it came from a large, carefully selected sample.
7Question
Although the theory was popular, several researchers remained <u>skeptical</u> until they saw stronger evidence.
8Question
The article's tone was surprisingly <u>sarcastic</u>, praising the 'brilliant' plan that had clearly failed.
9Question
The speaker's <u>eloquent</u> remarks moved the audience because she chose her words with skill and grace.
10Question
The apartment was small but <u>cozy</u>, with soft lighting, warm blankets, and a comfortable chair by the window.
11Question
The engineer proposed a <u>feasible</u> solution, one that could realistically be completed with the time and resources available.
12Question
The professor's explanation was not only accurate but also <u>lucid</u>, making a difficult concept easy to follow.
13Question
After weeks of negotiation, the two companies reached a <u>tentative</u> agreement, meaning the deal was not yet final.
14Question
The student's argument was <u>specious</u>: it sounded logical at first, but it depended on misleading details.
15Question
The diplomat used <u>subtle</u> language, hinting at disagreement without stating it directly.
16Question
Her criticism was <u>scathing</u>, leaving the impression that she considered the performance badly flawed.
17Question
The old manuscript was <u>obscure</u>, not because it was unimportant, but because its meaning was hard to determine.
18Question
The manager's remarks were <u>equivocal</u>, allowing listeners to interpret them in more than one way.
19Question
Although the evidence seemed convincing, the lawyer introduced an <u>exculpatory</u> document that suggested the defendant was not responsible.
20Question
The proposal was rejected as <u>untenable</u> because it could not be defended with the facts presented.
21Question
During the interview, the candidate was <u>reticent</u>, answering briefly and avoiding personal details.
22Question
The scientist's explanation was <u>parsimonious</u>: it used the fewest assumptions necessary to account for the results.
23Question
The policy had a <u>pernicious</u> effect on the school over time, gradually damaging morale and trust.
24Question
The author built a <u>composite</u> portrait of the city by combining interviews, statistics, and historical photographs.
25Question
The final recommendation was <u>cogent</u>: it was so well reasoned and clearly presented that it persuaded the entire panel.