Attribution and Citation Language in Technical Writing
5 exercises — correctly attributing claims and recommendations to external sources and internal documentation.
Key patterns:
according to — never "according with/by", always followed by "to"
as stated in — "in" for written documents, not "on/at"
note/state/report that... — reporting verbs take a bare that-clause, no extra preposition
per / as per — standalone formal prepositions, never "per to"
0 / 5 completed
1 / 5
A design document needs to attribute a recommendation to an external source. Which sentence uses correct attribution language?
"According to" is the fixed prepositional phrase used to attribute a claim, recommendation, or fact to a source. The preposition to is obligatory here and cannot be replaced with with, by, or omitted entirely — these are common errors for learners whose first language uses a different preposition after the equivalent phrase. This structure is standard in technical documentation when citing frameworks, standards, or vendor documentation.
2 / 5
A postmortem needs to reference internal documentation. Which sentence correctly uses "as stated in"?
"As stated in" is the correct fixed phrase for attributing a rule or fact to a written document, using the preposition in because the information is located "inside" the text of the document. "On" and "at" are incorrect prepositions in this collocation, and option C is missing the required preposition entirely after "stated," making it ungrammatical.
3 / 5
A technical blog post cites a source using reporting language. Which sentence correctly integrates a citation with appropriate reporting verb and structure?
Reporting verbs like note, state, observe, and report are typically followed directly by a that-clause (optionally omitting "that" in informal writing) without an additional preposition. "Note that + clause" is the standard structure; inserting about or for before the clause, as in options C and D, is a common preposition error, and option B introduces an unnecessary and confusing trailing phrase.
4 / 5
Which sentence correctly uses "per" as a formal attribution preposition in a compliance document?
"Per" functions as a standalone formal preposition meaning "in accordance with" and should not be followed by another preposition like to or of. The related phrase "as per" is also standalone and equally should not be followed by "to" (option C is a redundant double-preposition error). "Per the policy" and "as per the policy" are both correct; "per to" and "as per to" are not.
5 / 5
A security advisory needs to attribute a finding to a research team while hedging appropriately. Which sentence best combines attribution and hedged reporting?
"According to [named source], [hedged claim]" is the professional pattern for attributing a finding while preserving appropriate epistemic caution — combining a precise attribution phrase with a modal hedge (may) and a scope-limiting clause (under specific conditions). Option A undermines its own hedge by asserting "definitely true" right after "claim." Option D is vague and unprofessional, failing to name a specific, credible source, which is essential in security advisories.