Passive Voice and Nominalisation in Technical English
5 exercises — deciding when to use passive voice ('The deployment was completed'), nominalisation ('Deployment completion'), or active voice ('The team completed the deployment') in technical documentation.
0 / 20 completed
1 / 20
An incident report states: "The deployment was completed at 14:32 UTC." A technical editor suggests converting this to a nominalised form. Which is correct?
Option A is correct.Nominalisation converts a verb phrase into a noun phrase: "was completed" → "Deployment completion." This is appropriate in formal incident timelines and status reports where concise noun-heavy language is expected. The nominalised form "Deployment completion occurred at 14:32 UTC" is compact and suitable for timeline tables. Option B ("got completed") is informal — avoid "get passives" in technical documentation. Option C is active voice — accurate but the sentence loses the impersonal, event-focused tone of incident reporting. Option D is a fragment.
2 / 20
An architecture document compares two phrasings: (A) "The validation of user input is performed by the middleware layer." (B) "The middleware layer validates user input." Which is preferable, and why?
Option B is correct. When the agent is known and the sentence describes a straightforward action, active voice is clearer and more concise. "The middleware layer validates user input" (13 words reduced from 13 words, but the structure is direct and unambiguous). Passive + nominalisation ("The validation…is performed by…") adds syntactic complexity without adding information — it buries the agent in a "by" phrase. Passive and nominalised forms are appropriate when the agent is unknown, unimportant, or when noun-heavy language is required (e.g., section headings, status reports). Here the agent is explicit and relevant.
3 / 20
A release note states: "_____ of the authentication token _____ now _____ automatically on each API call." Which nominalised form completes the sentence correctly?
Option D is correct."Token refresh" is a compound noun nominalisation — the most natural and concise form for technical release notes. It avoids the awkward "refreshing of" (gerund-of construction is clunky) and the verbose "the refresh of the authentication token." In technical documentation, compound noun nominalisations (token refresh, deployment completion, cache invalidation, request validation) are preferred over gerund-of ("validating of") or noun-of ("the validation of") constructions. Option C is grammatically correct but verbose. Options A and B are grammatically awkward.
4 / 20
A requirements specification contains the sentence: "It is required that the system performs automatic log rotation." Which version uses passive nominalisation most appropriately for a formal requirement?
Option C is correct. In formal requirements specifications, passive + nominalisation is appropriate when the agent (the system) is implied by context and does not need to be stated. "Automatic log rotation is required" is concise, impersonal, and in line with RFC-style requirement language. Option A (active) is clear but the informal "must perform" is better in capability statements than feature requirements. Option B is correct but verbose. Option D is overly nominalised — "log rotation performance" is grammatically awkward. Use passive nominalisation in requirements to foreground the feature, not the agent.
5 / 20
Which sentence demonstrates the correct use of passive voice in technical documentation when the agent is unknown?
Option B is correct. The passive voice ("was modified") is the appropriate choice in technical and security documentation when the agent (who modified the file) is unknown or deliberately omitted. It keeps the focus on the affected object (the configuration file) and the significant detail (without authorisation). Option A ("someone modified") explicitly names an unknown agent — awkward in formal technical writing. Option C (nominalisation: "Modification…happened") is grammatically correct but the addition of "happened" makes it wordy; full nominalisation would be "Unauthorised modification of the configuration file was detected." Option D ("got modified") is informal — avoid "get passives" in security incident reports.
6 / 20
Sarah, a senior developer, left this comment on a code review:
'The server responded with a 500 error. We need to investigate the root cause.'
Which of the following nominalisations would be most appropriate for Mark to respond with, aiming for clearer technical communication?
This question tests the use of nominalisation to replace active verbs. Option 1 uses 'identify' which is a more precise and technical term than 'investigate' in this context. Options 2, 3, and 4 are overly vague and lack specific action words relevant to debugging, highlighting a common mistake – avoiding active voice when clarity demands it.
7 / 20
During a Slack discussion about performance issues with a microservice, David proposes:
'The system was overloaded by unexpected traffic.'
Which of the following best demonstrates a more effective phrasing using passive nominalisation for this situation?
This scenario tests passive voice for describing external forces impacting a system. Option 2 uses 'experienced' and 'due to', which are more formal and precise than the original phrasing. The other options are less suitable because they either re-iterate the active verb or are overly simplistic in their construction, failing to fully capture the technical nature of the problem.
8 / 20
A PR description for a new feature states:
'The API endpoint has been updated to handle requests.'
Which nominalised form would be the most effective way to convey this change in a concise and professional manner?
This question assesses the correct placement of nominalisation. Option 1 clearly states that 'requests are handled' by the endpoint, avoiding unnecessary repetition and creating a more streamlined sentence. The other options either rephrase the action or introduce superfluous wording, demonstrating an understanding of how to best utilise passive voice for technical documentation.
9 / 20
In a standup update, Emily reports:
'The database connection was established successfully.'
Which of the following options best demonstrates the use of passive nominalisation to convey this status in a succinct and professional way?
This exercise focuses on concise reporting. Option 2 is the most appropriate because it employs passive voice to highlight the state of the connection – that it *was* established – without drawing attention to who performed the action (which may be unknown or unimportant in a standup). The other options are less suitable due to their emphasis on active verbs and unnecessary phrasing.
10 / 20
A technical specification states: 'The system shall automatically validate all incoming data.'
Which nominalisation best aligns with the requirements of a formal specification document?
This question tests the appropriate use of passive voice in a formal setting. Option 1 presents the requirement as a definitive statement – 'all incoming data *is* automatically validated' – which is the standard phrasing for specifications. The other options introduce unnecessary elements like 'will be' or shift the focus to the system performing the action, making it less precise and suitable for a technical specification.
11 / 20
Sarah, a senior developer, left this comment on a code review:
'The server responded with a 500 error. We need to investigate the root cause.'
Which of the following nominalisations would be most appropriate for Mark to respond with, aiming for clearer technical communication?
This question tests the use of nominalisation to replace active verbs. Option 1 uses 'identify' which is a more precise and technical term than 'investigate' in this context. Options 2, 3, and 4 are overly vague and lack specific action words relevant to debugging, highlighting a common mistake – avoiding active voice when clarity demands it.
12 / 20
During a Slack discussion about performance issues with a microservice, David proposes:
'The system was overloaded by unexpected traffic.'
Which of the following best demonstrates a more effective phrasing using passive nominalisation for this situation?
This scenario tests passive voice for describing external forces impacting a system. Option 2 uses 'experienced' and 'due to', which are more formal and precise than the original phrasing. The other options are less suitable because they either re-iterate the active verb or are overly simplistic in their construction, failing to fully capture the technical nature of the problem.
13 / 20
A PR description for a new feature states:
'The API endpoint has been updated to handle requests.'
Which nominalised form would be the most effective way to convey this change in a concise and professional manner?
This question assesses the correct placement of nominalisation. Option 1 clearly states that 'requests are handled' by the endpoint, avoiding unnecessary repetition and creating a more streamlined sentence. The other options either rephrase the action or introduce superfluous wording, demonstrating an understanding of how to best utilise passive voice for technical documentation.
14 / 20
In a standup update, Emily reports:
'The database connection was established successfully.'
Which of the following options best demonstrates the use of passive nominalisation to convey this status in a succinct and professional way?
This exercise focuses on concise reporting. Option 2 is the most appropriate because it employs passive voice to highlight the state of the connection – that it *was* established – without drawing attention to who performed the action (which may be unknown or unimportant in a standup). The other options are less suitable due to their emphasis on active verbs and unnecessary phrasing.
15 / 20
A technical specification states: 'The system shall automatically validate all incoming data.'
Which nominalisation best aligns with the requirements of a formal specification document?
This question tests the appropriate use of passive voice in a formal setting. Option 1 presents the requirement as a definitive statement – 'all incoming data *is* automatically validated' – which is the standard phrasing for specifications. The other options introduce unnecessary elements like 'will be' or shift the focus to the system performing the action, making it less precise and suitable for a technical specification.
16 / 20
Sarah, a senior developer, left this comment on a code review:
'The server responded with a 500 error. We need to investigate the root cause.'
Which of the following nominalisations would be most appropriate for Mark to respond with, aiming for clearer technical communication?
This question tests the use of nominalisation to replace active verbs. Option 1 uses 'identify' which is a more precise and technical term than 'investigate' in this context. Options 2, 3, and 4 are overly vague and lack specific action words relevant to debugging, highlighting a common mistake – avoiding active voice when clarity demands it.
17 / 20
During a Slack discussion about performance issues with a microservice, David proposes:
'The system was overloaded by unexpected traffic.'
Which of the following best demonstrates a more effective phrasing using passive nominalisation for this situation?
This scenario tests passive voice for describing external forces impacting a system. Option 2 uses 'experienced' and 'due to', which are more formal and precise than the original phrasing. The other options are less suitable because they either re-iterate the active verb or are overly simplistic in their construction, failing to fully capture the technical nature of the problem.
18 / 20
A PR description for a new feature states:
'The API endpoint has been updated to handle requests.'
Which nominalised form would be the most effective way to convey this change in a concise and professional manner?
This question assesses the correct placement of nominalisation. Option 1 clearly states that 'requests are handled' by the endpoint, avoiding unnecessary repetition and creating a more streamlined sentence. The other options either rephrase the action or introduce superfluous wording, demonstrating an understanding of how to best utilise passive voice for technical documentation.
19 / 20
In a standup update, Emily reports:
'The database connection was established successfully.'
Which of the following options best demonstrates the use of passive nominalisation to convey this status in a succinct and professional way?
This exercise focuses on concise reporting. Option 2 is the most appropriate because it employs passive voice to highlight the state of the connection – that it *was* established – without drawing attention to who performed the action (which may be unknown or unimportant in a standup). The other options are less suitable due to their emphasis on active verbs and unnecessary phrasing.
20 / 20
A technical specification states: 'The system shall automatically validate all incoming data.'
Which nominalisation best aligns with the requirements of a formal specification document?
This question tests the appropriate use of passive voice in a formal setting. Option 1 presents the requirement as a definitive statement – 'all incoming data *is* automatically validated' – which is the standard phrasing for specifications. The other options introduce unnecessary elements like 'will be' or shift the focus to the system performing the action, making it less precise and suitable for a technical specification.
What will I practise in "Passive Voice and Nominalisation in Technical English — Grammar Exercise"?
Practise combining passive voice with nominalisation in technical English documentation.
How many exercises are in this module?
This module has 20 multiple-choice exercises, each with instant feedback and a full explanation of the correct answer.
Is this exercise free to use?
Yes. Every exercise on CoderSlingo, including this one, is free to use with no account, sign-up, or paywall.
Do I need to create an account to do these exercises?
No account is required. Just click an option to answer — your score for this session is tracked automatically in the progress bar above.
What happens if I choose the wrong answer?
You'll immediately see which answer was correct, plus a full explanation covering the grammar rule and reasoning behind it — mistakes are where most of the learning happens.
Can I retry the exercises if I want a higher score?
Yes — use the "Try again" button on the results screen to reset and go through all the questions again.
Is my progress saved if I close the page?
No. Progress is tracked only for your current visit; reloading or leaving the page resets the counter. This keeps the exercise simple and account-free.
Where can I find more Grammar exercises?
Browse the full Grammar hub for related drills, or check the "Next up" link below to continue with a connected topic.
How is this different from reading an article on the same topic?
Articles explain grammar rules in prose; this exercise tests and reinforces those rules through active recall with immediate feedback — the two work best together.
Who writes these exercises?
Every exercise is written by the CoderSlingo team, drawing on real workplace English used in IT roles, then reviewed for accuracy and clarity.