Upper-Intermediate
Grammar
#relativeClauses
#ITEnglish
Reduced Relative Clauses in IT Documentation
5 exercises — practise reducing 'which/that/who' relative clauses to participial phrases for concise technical documentation.
0 / 27 completed
1 / 27
Which is the best reduced form of "the function that is exported from the module"?
The relative clause "that is exported" is passive (the function receives the action of exporting). When reducing a passive relative clause, drop "that is/which is" and keep the past participle: "exported". The result is a passive participial phrase used as a pre-modifier: "the exported function". Compare: "the function that exports data" (active) → "the function exporting data" (present participle, -ing). Rule: passive relative clause → past participle; active relative clause → present participle (-ing).
2 / 27
Which sentence correctly uses a participial phrase to replace an active relative clause?
To reduce an active relative clause ("that runs"), drop "that" and change the verb to its -ing (present participle) form: "running". The participial phrase "running in the background" now post-modifies "process" — this is a post-positioned reduced clause. Option A ("the run process") uses the past participle, which would mean the process has been run/terminated — wrong meaning. Option C creates an over-hyphenated pre-modifier, which is awkward and non-standard. Option D keeps "that" with the -ing form — incorrect structure.
3 / 27
Which option correctly reduces the relative clause in: "The API response, which contains the user token, must be encrypted"?
The relative clause "which contains the user token" is active (the response actively contains the token), so reduce it using the present participle: "containing". The commas are retained because the original clause was non-restrictive (set off by commas) — the participial phrase is also non-restrictive. Option B uses "contained" (past participle), which implies the token was previously contained but no longer is — wrong meaning. Option C drops one comma — incorrect for non-restrictive phrases. Option D turns it into a pre-modifier, creating an awkward noun stack.
4 / 27
How should "The engineer who manages the infrastructure team approves all deployments" be reduced?
The restrictive relative clause "who manages the infrastructure team" (no commas — essential to identify which engineer) can be reduced: drop "who" and use the present participle "managing". The result: "The engineer managing the infrastructure team approves all deployments." Note: no commas are used because it remains restrictive (it identifies a specific engineer). Option A uses "managed" (past participle, passive meaning — wrong). Option C creates an ungrammatical structure. Option D is wrong — restrictive relative clauses CAN be reduced; it is non-restrictive clauses that are sometimes left unreduced for clarity.
5 / 27
Which relative clause CANNOT be reduced to a participial phrase without creating ambiguity or error?
Option C creates ambiguity: "The developer writing this code left the company" implies the developer is currently writing the code (present participle = ongoing action), but the original past tense "who wrote" refers to a completed, past action. The reduction changes the temporal meaning. The original must be rephrased or kept: "The developer who wrote this code has left the company." Options A, B, and D are all valid reductions: A uses a past participle correctly (passive action); B uses a present participle for an ongoing active role; D uses a present participle (errors that appear/are appearing in the log).
6 / 27
Alex: 'I'm reviewing this commit. The code uses the validate_user() function that is exported from the `auth` module. Can we reduce this?'Reduced relative clauses are common in documentation to improve readability. Here, 'validated user' is a concise participial phrase that accurately describes the function's purpose without needing the full relative clause. Option A suggests an irrelevant issue; option D reflects overly cautious phrasing.
7 / 27
Sarah (in a Slack channel) writes: 'The error message from the API response, which contains the user token, needs to be logged.' Which of these is the best way to revise this for clarity and conciseness?Using a participial phrase – 'containing the user token' – directly modifies 'error message,' creating a clear and concise statement. Option B is overly verbose; option D introduces unnecessary elements. This demonstrates how reduced relative clauses streamline communication.
8 / 27
Alex: 'I'm reviewing this commit. The code uses the validate_user() function that is exported from the `auth` module. Can we reduce this?'Reduced relative clauses are common in documentation to improve readability. Here, 'validated user' is a concise participial phrase that accurately describes the function's purpose without needing the full relative clause. Option A suggests an irrelevant issue; option D reflects overly cautious phrasing.
9 / 27
Sarah (in a Slack channel) writes: 'The error message from the API response, which contains the user token, needs to be logged.' Which of these is the best way to revise this for clarity and conciseness?Using a participial phrase – 'containing the user token' – directly modifies 'error message,' creating a clear and concise statement. Option B is overly verbose; option D introduces unnecessary elements. This demonstrates how reduced relative clauses streamline communication.
10 / 27
Alex: 'I'm reviewing this commit. The code uses the validate_user() function that is exported from the `auth` module. Can we reduce this?'Reduced relative clauses are common in documentation to improve readability. Here, 'validated user' is a concise participial phrase that accurately describes the function's purpose without needing the full relative clause. Option A suggests an irrelevant issue; option D reflects overly cautious phrasing.
11 / 27
Sarah (in a Slack channel) writes: 'The error message from the API response, which contains the user token, needs to be logged.' Which of these is the best way to revise this for clarity and conciseness?Using a participial phrase – 'containing the user token' – directly modifies 'error message,' creating a clear and concise statement. Option B is overly verbose; option D introduces unnecessary elements. This demonstrates how reduced relative clauses streamline communication.
12 / 27
During a standup update, David says: 'We're implementing the new feature that allows users to upload images. The API endpoint, which handles image processing, needs careful validation.' Which of the following is the most concise way to express this information?
This question tests reducing relative clauses in a spoken context. The core issue is avoiding redundancy. 'That allows users to upload images' is implied by 'implementing the new feature.' Option 1 directly states the necessary action without repeating the descriptive clause. Options 2, 3 and 4 all contain unnecessary information or rephrase the same idea awkwardly.
13 / 27
Maria is writing a PR description for a change to the authentication service. She writes: 'The code now returns the user token in the response object, which must be stored securely.' Which revision best uses a reduced relative clause?
This question focuses on a specific phrasing. The original sentence contains two relative clauses that can be combined effectively. Option 2 maintains clarity and conciseness by directly stating what needs to be done after the action is described. Options 1 and 3 repeat information, while option 4 shifts the focus unnecessarily.
14 / 27
During a code review, David says: 'The authentication service uses the authenticate_user() function that's called when a user attempts to log in. This is essential for security.' Which of the following best represents this statement using a reduced relative clause?
This question evaluates understanding of the limitations of reduced relative clauses. The phrase 'which is called when a user attempts to log in' needs to be combined with the core action. Option 2 correctly integrates the descriptive clause into the main statement while maintaining clarity and conciseness. Options 1 and 3 are overly verbose, and option 4 changes the sentence structure significantly.
15 / 27
Liam is writing a comment on a code review. He says: 'This function handles the data transformation, which is critical for our performance metrics.' Which of the following revisions best demonstrates reduced relative clause usage?
Liam's original sentence uses a relative clause to add detail. Reducing it involves using a participle ('data transformation') to describe the core action. Options B and C are incorrect because they introduce unnecessary redundancy. Option D incorrectly uses a semicolon, which is unsuitable here.
16 / 27
During a standup meeting, Chloe states: 'We're deploying the new service that integrates with the legacy system. The API endpoint, which handles data synchronization, needs monitoring.' Which revision demonstrates the most concise and effective use of a reduced relative clause?
Chloe's original sentence contains two relative clauses. Reducing one to a participle simplifies the statement and avoids unnecessary repetition. Option A is incorrect because it removes a crucial conjunction. Options C and D incorrectly use semicolons or add redundant phrasing.
17 / 27
David is reviewing a commit related to the payment gateway. He comments: 'The code validates the transaction data, which ensures accurate billing.' Which of the following revisions best demonstrates effective use of a reduced relative clause?
David's original sentence uses a relative clause to explain *why* the transaction data is validated. The participle 'validates' already implies that purpose. Options A and C are redundant; Option D incorrectly utilizes 'and'.
18 / 27
Sarah is writing a Slack message to report an issue with the reporting service. She writes: 'The API response contains the error code, which indicates the reason for the failure.' Which of these revisions best uses reduced relative clauses?
Sarah's original sentence includes a relative clause explaining the *function* of the error code. Reducing it to 'contains' is the most concise and grammatically correct approach. Options A and C are redundant; Option D contains an unnecessary conjunction.
19 / 27
Ben is writing a PR description for a new feature that allows users to reset their passwords. He writes: 'The code sends an email containing a link that resets the user's password, which needs to be tracked in our audit logs.' Which revision best uses a reduced relative clause to improve clarity?
This question tests reducing relative clauses related to security auditing. The original phrasing is overly verbose. Option 1 is correct as it retains the core meaning with a more concise structure. Options 2 and 3 unnecessarily repeat information about tracking, while option 3 creates an ungrammatical construction.
20 / 27
Emily is reviewing a commit that updates the user authentication service. She comments: 'The code uses the `verify_password()` function which checks if the provided password matches the stored hash.' Which revision best demonstrates reducing this relative clause?
This question tests reducing relative clauses describing functionality. The key here is to replace 'which' with a more direct and concise phrasing. Option 1 avoids redundant phrases like 'to check' while maintaining clarity about the function's purpose.
21 / 27
George is writing a standup update about the new monitoring service. He says: 'We're implementing the feature that allows us to track API request latency, which helps identify performance bottlenecks.' Which revision best demonstrates reducing this relative clause?
This question tests reducing relative clauses when explaining a system's purpose. Option 2 is the most concise and effective because it directly states the function of tracking latency – avoiding the 'which' clause improves readability considerably. The other options either add unnecessary phrasing or remain overly verbose.
22 / 27
Hannah is writing a code review comment about a function that calculates user session timeouts. She says: 'This function handles the timeout calculation, which prevents unauthorized access.' Which revision best demonstrates reduced relative clauses?
This question tests reducing relative clauses related to security. Option 1 is best because it directly states the purpose of the function – preventing unauthorized access – without unnecessary 'which' phrasing. It's a clear and concise way to explain the function's critical role.
23 / 27
Mark is writing a comment on a code review for the user profile service. He says: 'The API endpoint returns the user's last login timestamp, which helps us understand their activity.' Which of the following revisions best uses reduced relative clauses to improve clarity?
A
B
C
DThe question tests understanding of reducing relative clauses to avoid unnecessary phrasing. Option A is the best because it directly replaces 'which' with a more concise statement. Options B, C and D all include extra phrases that can be removed for better clarity. The core issue is streamlining the dependent clause.
24 / 27
During a Slack discussion about a new microservice, Elena writes: 'The service exposes an API endpoint that validates user input, which is crucial for preventing vulnerabilities.' Which revision best demonstrates effective use of reduced relative clauses?
A
B
C
DThis question focuses on conciseness within a Slack message. Option B is the most concise and direct way to express the same idea by removing the redundant 'which' clause. It maintains clarity while reducing wordiness – a key skill for effective communication.
25 / 27
Liam is drafting a PR description for a change to the billing service. He writes: 'The code calculates the total amount due, which is based on usage data.' Which revision best uses reduced relative clauses?
A
B
C
DThis question tests whether the user can identify a simple restructuring to remove an unnecessary relative clause. Option A is the most direct and concise revision, eliminating 'which' while preserving meaning. The other options include extra phrases that add no value.
26 / 27
David is providing a standup update on the new data pipeline. He says: 'The pipeline processes incoming events, which are then stored in the database.' Which of the following revisions best demonstrates reduced relative clauses?
A
B
C
DThis scenario tests understanding of how relative clauses can be removed within a standup update. Option A provides a direct and concise revision by combining the two related actions into one sentence, eliminating the 'which' clause. It's important to maintain a clear flow when communicating updates quickly.
27 / 27
Sarah is writing a code review comment about a function that handles user authentication. She says: 'The function verifies the user's password against the stored hash, which ensures security.' Which revision best uses reduced relative clauses?
A
B
C
DThis question tests understanding of reducing relative clauses within a code review comment. Option B is the most effective revision because it removes 'which' and uses 'ensuring' as an adverb for a more concise and professional tone. The goal here is to get straight to the essential information.
Next up:
More Grammar Exercises →
Frequently Asked Questions
What will I practise in "Reduced Relative Clauses in IT Documentation — Grammar Exercise"?
Practise reducing relative clauses to participial phrases in technical writing: active vs passive reductions, restrictive vs non-restrictive, and when
How many exercises are in this module?
This module has 27 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.