Write an Email — reader, purpose, register

Clear sentences cannot supply a missing request. Check the scenario for every action it requires.

The second identifies the purpose and event. Background or thanks can fit elsewhere, but alone they leave the immediate issue unclear. Making the purpose clear early is a useful choice, not a compulsory sentence-position rule.

You were given her name and she is a peer. 'Hi Sara' matches that reader; a generic formal salutation does not.

If you already know you cannot join, a vague maybe leaves your classmate unable to plan. Decline clearly, give a reason and stay warm.

A replacement must hold the group and be accessible. Those details let the reader act on the request.

A useful follow-up says: “Thank you. We need step-free access because one participant cannot use stairs. Is a suitable ground-floor room available?” It names the unmet need without repeating the entire first email.

The booking-office email already asks for tables, step-free access and confirmation by Thursday. If the office offers a room upstairs with no lift, that offer does not meet the access requirement. A useful follow-up says: “Thank you. We need step-free access because one participant cannot use stairs. Is a suitable ground-floor room available?” It names the unmet need without repeating the entire first email.

Give purpose, necessary details and the requested action; check the message from the reader’s position.

The first identifies the report and the requested discussion. General background or thanks alone leaves the topic unclear. Add the relevant course work and question, rather than a long introduction.

The second distinguishes the new room, old room and unchanged time. The question turns a confirmed change into a new proposal. Report the decision as a decision.

The third is warm and definite. A maybe would obscure a decision already known. Use uncertainty only where it is real.

The first connects the fault with the event. Location may identify the machine but does not explain the effect; repeating the fault adds no consequence. Match the missing job.

The second is direct and considerate for a peer. The other choices are inflated or demanding. Politeness does not require distance from a person you know.

The third asks for unknown information. The others invent confirmation. Check whether your sentence reports a fact or requests a decision.

The first defines an output and a deadline. A vague something does not specify the work; a meeting date alone does not state when the summary is due. Make the instruction usable.

The date conflict may send readers to the wrong event day. Correct all references before adding detail or formality. Factual consistency is part of clear communication.

An information email can finish after giving the needed details with a suitable close. Do not manufacture a request that the situation does not call for.

The first reflects flexible, purposeful organisation. Sentence placement and a four-sentence plan are not universal requirements. Judge whether the reader can understand the issue promptly.

The first answers the partner’s question with the confirmed columns. Praise does not identify them, and requesting new choices changes the agreed task. Supply the needed facts.

The third requests an unconfirmed change. The other options report approval that does not exist in the situation. Keep proposal and confirmation separate.

The second describes the choice and when input is useful. A completed booking or past event would contradict the current stage. State both status and next action.

The first identifies what fails and how it affects study. The general complaint leaves both vague; location alone cannot explain the effect. Describe observable detail.

The third asks about a possibility. The other messages invent acceptance. A late request should acknowledge uncertainty rather than announce an outcome.

The second is definite and gives an available alternative. The first contradicts itself; the good wish alone does not answer availability. Give a usable response.

The first identifies the comment and location. A grade demand changes the purpose; the broad accusation invents a judgement. Ask about the actual uncertainty.

The third states the timing problem and asks for an unknown arrangement. The first contradicts the closing time, and description alone does not solve the return issue. Make the constraint explicit.

The second supplies a location and a bounded time. Package size is another detail; later gives no usable appointment. State the requested arrangement.

The first gives both requested facts. Interest is relevant background but incomplete, and asking the office to identify your programme reverses the information flow. Answer the actual questions.

The third removes the contradiction. Praise cannot fix directions, and inventing a second booking creates another unsupported fact. Check repeated arrangements across the whole message.

The second identifies the exact correction and requests an action. The alternatives invent intent or a general pattern from one error. Correct the fact without adding an unsupported accusation.

The first names the document and expected supply time. Enthusiasm or a general workload leaves the office without the requested status. Use an expectation, not a guarantee beyond the facts.

The third distinguishes the request from approval and explains the next update. The alternatives announce a final decision prematurely. Keep plans and confirmed arrangements separate.

The second identifies the helpful material and its benefit. General thanks is less developed; a guarantee changes the purpose and cannot be supported. Explain what mattered.

The first gives a bounded proposal and relevant reason without assuming consent. The demand ignores the tutor’s decision; the thanks invents it. Ask clearly and leave the decision open.

The third names the item and destination. Pronouns or usual place have no established reference here. Replace vague language with the information the reader lacks.

The second acknowledges the problem and asks about a concrete handover. Description omits the return; the last option contradicts availability. Make the repair arrangement clear.

The first asks for the missing access information. Upstairs alone proves neither that a lift exists nor that access is impossible. Request confirmation instead of guessing.

The third assigns each task to an owner. A named greeting does not establish work responsibilities. Revise the information job, not only the appearance of the email.

Compare what each sentence does, not whether it matches the model’s wording. Several complete messages can fulfil the situation. A self-review event records reflection; it is not an automatic judgement of writing correctness.

Use the comparison to check task coverage, specificity and certainty. The model is not an ETS-rated answer, and ticking a checklist cannot establish a score. If a reader could not identify the request, revise the relevant sentence before recording your self-review.

The second identifies the changed fact, retains the unchanged room and tells the reader which arrangement to use. Vagueness or a new proposal would obscure a confirmed correction.

The first gives thanks, identifies the help and explains its effect. A demand changes the purpose; an unnamed change leaves the contribution unclear. Transfer the method to appreciation rather than requests.

The third retrieves the flexible principle: useful context and a greeting may precede the purpose. Judge clear, relevant communication and coverage, not an invented position rule.

The second recalls that purpose varies. Keep the requested information and close appropriately; do not add a demand or remove needed facts merely to follow a template.