Stance Nouns with That-Clauses in Technical Writing
5 exercises — using stance nouns with appositive that-clauses to hedge or assert claims precisely in design docs and code reviews.
Key patterns:
concern/assumption/possibility + that — no preposition before the content clause
content-clause that cannot be replaced by "which", unlike relative "that"
choose the stance noun to match your confidence level: chance/possibility (hedged) vs fact/proof (asserted)
0 / 19 completed
1 / 19
Which sentence correctly uses a stance noun followed by a "that" clause to express the writer's assessment in a design doc?
Stance nouns like concern, assumption, possibility, and risk are typically followed directly by a "that" clause stating the content of the stance: concern that the schema might break.... Option A incorrectly inserts "about" before the clause. Option C uses the relative pronoun "which", which doesn't fit this appositive-style complement structure. Option D awkwardly relocates "about" to the end, which is ungrammatical here.
2 / 19
Choose the sentence that correctly uses the stance noun "assumption" with an appositive that-clause in an RFC:
"Assumption that" is the correct pattern — the noun "assumption" takes an appositive that-clause specifying its content. Options B and D incorrectly insert prepositions ("of", "for") before the clause, which is ungrammatical with this noun-complement structure. Option C uses "which", appropriate for relative clauses referring back to an antecedent, not for stating the content of an abstract noun like "assumption".
3 / 19
A postmortem states: "There is a _____ that this same failure mode could recur in the payments service." Which stance noun best conveys an unresolved, forward-looking risk (not a certainty)?
"Possibility" correctly conveys an unresolved, hypothetical risk about a future recurrence. "Fact" (option A) and "conclusion" (option C) both imply certainty or a settled determination, which contradicts the speculative nature of "could recur". "Evidence" (option D) refers to supporting data for a claim, not the claim of future risk itself, and doesn't fit naturally as "evidence that X could recur" in this stance-marking role as well as "possibility" does.
4 / 19
Which sentence correctly distinguishes a stance noun + that-clause from a relative clause modifying the same noun?
Option B correctly identifies the key ambiguity: in "the claim that the team made", "that" is a relative pronoun standing in for the object of "made" (you could substitute "which"). In "the claim that the fix resolved the issue", "that" introduces a content clause stating what the claim asserts, and cannot be replaced with "which" ("the claim which the fix resolved the issue" is ungrammatical, ruling out option C). This distinction matters because content-clause "that" cannot be omitted or replaced the way relative "that" sometimes can.
5 / 19
A code review comment reads: "There's a _____ that this refactor introduces a subtle off-by-one error." Which stance noun most precisely signals a hedged, tentative observation rather than a strong claim?
"Chance" appropriately hedges the claim, signaling the reviewer is flagging a possibility worth checking rather than asserting a confirmed bug. "Certainty" (option A), "proof" (option C), and "fact" (option D) all imply a confirmed, verified claim, which would overstate what a reviewer typically knows before the code has been tested — using one of these would misrepresent the reviewer's actual epistemic stance.
6 / 19
During a Slack discussion about the new API endpoint, Sarah says: 'I'm concerned that the rate limiting is insufficient to handle peak load.' Which stance noun best captures her apprehension regarding the current implementation? Consider the nuance of expressing doubt without definitively stating a failure.
The correct answer, 'limitation,' accurately reflects Sarah's concern. A 'limitation' implies a measurable restriction, aligning with the API's capacity. The other options frame the issue as a definitive problem (failure, deficiency) or an inherent characteristic (constraint), which doesn't capture her cautious assessment.
7 / 19
In a Pull Request description for a database migration script, David writes: 'There's a risk that the schema changes will impact existing reporting queries.' Which stance noun most appropriately conveys this potential negative consequence? The focus here is on a possible outcome, not a confirmed error.
'Deviation' is the most suitable stance noun here. It denotes a change or departure from something standard, precisely what David is concerned about with the schema modifications. 'Impact' and 'consequence' are too strong, suggesting a definite problem. 'Side effect' is also less precise than 'deviation' in this context.
8 / 19
In a code review comment on a new feature, Emily says: 'I'm worried that the asynchronous processing introduces a potential for data inconsistencies.' Which stance noun best reflects her cautious observation about a possible issue?
'Risk' is the most appropriate stance noun. It acknowledges a potential negative outcome without asserting a certainty of failure. Using 'risk' highlights the possibility of inconsistency due to asynchronous processing. The other options present the situation as a confirmed error or bug.
9 / 19
During a Slack discussion about the new API endpoint, Sarah says: 'I'm concerned that the rate limiting is insufficient to handle peak load.' Which stance noun best captures her apprehension regarding the current implementation? Consider the nuance of expressing doubt without definitively stating a failure.
The correct answer, 'limitation,' accurately reflects Sarah's concern. A 'limitation' implies a measurable restriction, aligning with the API's capacity. The other options frame the issue as a definitive problem (failure, deficiency) or an inherent characteristic (constraint), which doesn't capture her cautious assessment.
10 / 19
In a Pull Request description for a database migration script, David writes: 'There's a risk that the schema changes will impact existing reporting queries.' Which stance noun most appropriately conveys this potential negative consequence? The focus here is on a possible outcome, not a confirmed error.
'Deviation' is the most suitable stance noun here. It denotes a change or departure from something standard, precisely what David is concerned about with the schema modifications. 'Impact' and 'consequence' are too strong, suggesting a definite problem. 'Side effect' is also less precise than 'deviation' in this context.
11 / 19
In a code review comment on a new feature, Emily says: 'I'm worried that the asynchronous processing introduces a potential for data inconsistencies.' Which stance noun best reflects her cautious observation about a possible issue?
'Risk' is the most appropriate stance noun. It acknowledges a potential negative outcome without asserting a certainty of failure. Using 'risk' highlights the possibility of inconsistency due to asynchronous processing. The other options present the situation as a confirmed error or bug.
12 / 19
During a standup update, Mark states: 'There's an assumption that all users will have stable internet connectivity.' Which stance noun most accurately reflects Mark's statement about a potentially flawed premise?
'Presumption' correctly captures Mark's statement as an assumption – a belief taken for granted without sufficient justification. The other options misrepresent the nuance of the stance noun, which focuses on an unverified belief rather than a logical conclusion or personal conviction.
13 / 19
In a code review comment, Alex writes: 'There's a risk that the new caching layer introduces performance bottlenecks.' Which stance noun best conveys this potential negative consequence without asserting it as a certainty?
'Potential' is the most precise choice here as it directly addresses the uncertainty associated with the caching layer. 'Consequence' is a broader term, and 'liability' and 'vulnerability' are irrelevant to the scenario. This emphasizes that the issue *could* arise, rather than being a definite certainty.
14 / 19
During a code review, Sarah says: 'There's a belief that this change will improve the application's overall stability.' Which stance noun best reflects her statement about an unproven assumption?
'Belief' is the most precise choice as it directly acknowledges that the statement is an assumption—a conviction without proof. The other options are inappropriate for conveying the uncertainty inherent in the situation.
15 / 19
During a Slack discussion about a new microservice deployment, Ben says: 'I'm concerned that the increased latency is a significant risk to our user experience. There's a _____ that users will abandon the service if it remains unresponsive.' Which stance noun best captures Ben's apprehension regarding the potential impact?
The key here is to identify a noun representing potential harm. 'Risk' directly aligns with the scenario of a negative impact on the user experience. 'Insufficient' describes a lack of resources, 'violation' refers to process errors, and 'constraint' relates to technical limitations – none effectively capture Ben's concern about user abandonment.
16 / 19
In a PR description for a new authentication module, Liam writes: 'There's an assumption that all users will adhere to the password complexity policy. This is a _____ that could compromise security if not consistently enforced.' Which stance noun most accurately reflects Liam's statement about a potentially flawed premise?
The question focuses on a potentially problematic assumption. 'Vulnerability' is the most precise term here as it directly relates to a weakness that could be exploited due to the unverified assumption. The other options describe consequences or difficulties rather than the inherent problem with the underlying premise.
17 / 19
A code review comment reads: 'There's a belief that this new caching strategy will improve response times. However, there's a _____ that it might introduce inconsistencies in data retrieval.' Which stance noun best reflects the cautious observation regarding a potential negative outcome?
'Uncertainty' is the most appropriate choice because it acknowledges the lack of definitive knowledge about the long-term consequences. The comment highlights a potential problem without asserting it as a certainty. 'Deviation' describes a change in design, 'paradox' introduces an illogical situation, and 'possibility' is too weak to convey the cautious tone.
18 / 19
David writes in a Pull Request description: 'There's a risk that the new microservice exposes an undocumented API endpoint.' Which stance noun best captures David's cautious assessment of this potential vulnerability, emphasizing it as a possibility rather than a confirmed issue?
'Exposure' correctly identifies a stance noun signifying potential harm. It highlights the fact that something is made available without safeguards, aligning with the cautious tone of the description. The other options are not suitable stance nouns in this context; 'vulnerability' implies inherent weakness, 'risk' is too general, and 'defect' refers to a specific coding error.
19 / 19
Maria writes in a PR description: 'There's a belief that using the new library will improve performance. However, there's a _____ that it might introduce compatibility issues with older versions of our application.' Which stance noun most appropriately conveys this potential negative consequence without asserting it as a certain threat?
'Risk' is the most precise stance noun here. It acknowledges a potential problem without assigning blame or certainty. 'Problem,' 'concern,' and 'issue' are all too strong; they imply a definite negative outcome. The phrasing 'unforeseen complications' aligns perfectly with using 'risk.'
What will I practise in "Stance Nouns with That-Clauses in Technical Writing — IT English Grammar Exercise"?
Practice stance nouns like concern, assumption, possibility, and chance with appositive that-clauses in design docs, RFCs, and code reviews.
How many exercises are in this module?
This module has 19 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.