Studyledge

Descriptive Composition: Question 3

Syllabus W3

Structured 6 marks

In the extract below, the writer has used the verb "went" three times. This flattens the description and misses a chance to add precise detail through verb choice alone.

"The old man went across the road, avoiding the puddles. At the corner, a stray dog went past him, its ribs visible beneath a matted coat. Overhead, the last of the starlings went towards the church tower, calling to each other in the fading light."

Suggest one precise verb to replace each instance of "went" (three verbs in total), and for each, explain briefly what effect your chosen verb has on the picture the reader forms. [6]

Show worked solution Hide worked solution

Worked solution

Assessment focus

This tests precise vocabulary choice: selecting a verb that does the work of an entire descriptive clause, and being able to articulate its specific effect rather than simply naming a synonym.

Mark scheme (6 marks)

  • 2 marks per instance (6 total): 1 mark for a verb that is precise and consistent with surrounding detail, 1 mark for an explanation naming the specific effect on the reader’s picture (pace, character, mood), not just a definition of the word.

Model answers

  1. “shuffled” instead of “went across”, suggests age and frailty through a slow, dragging gait, which fits naturally with his careful avoidance of the puddles.
  2. “slunk” instead of “went past”, implies wariness and self-consciousness, reinforcing the vulnerability already suggested by the dog’s visible ribs.
  3. “streamed” instead of “went towards”. Suggests the starlings moving together as a single fluid mass, giving a sense of grace and quiet urgency as dusk falls.

Why this works

Each replacement verb does more than describe movement: “shuffled” implies the old man’s physical state, “slunk” implies the dog’s emotional wariness, and “streamed” implies the birds’ collective, fluid motion. Precisely the extra work a single well-chosen verb can do that a neutral verb like “went” cannot.

Common pitfalls specific to this task

  • Replacing “went” with “walked” for the old man. Accurate, but no more precise or informative than the original, so it earns no credit for effect.
  • Choosing “dashed” for the dog, which would clash with the vulnerable, defeated impression already given by “ribs visible beneath a matted coat.”