Learner distinguishes six pairs where the negative member implies excess or deficiency of the same quality, and judges calibration rather than the quality itself.
Preview · progress not saved — Chapter 1 is free
Two words built from the same root, one of which is a compliment. Work out what carries the difference.
He has a childlike enthusiasm for the work.
He has a childish enthusiasm for the work.
Same root. Same suffix pattern. Same person, same enthusiasm, same job.
The first is a compliment. The second is a complaint. Nothing in the root did that.
The calibration test, the deficiency case that breaks the pattern, and the three words in this sprint whose verdict genuinely depends on the noun.
Before writing any of these six words, answer one question:
What was the right amount of this quality here, and what shows that the subject went past it?
If you can point at the right amount — the meeting where a firm reply would have settled it, the objection the model could not answer — the word is available. If you cannot, you are asserting a proportion you have not measured, and a reader is entitled to say how much is too much?
This is a harder standard than Sprint 1.1's. There, stubborn needed evidence that a position should have moved. Here, aggressive needs evidence of the degree that would have been enough.
Eighteen real phrases. Decide what each one is doing before anything tells you — and notice how many refuse to sit in either box.
Sort each item into the correct category
Six dials. In each, the two words sit on the same axis with a line between them — which is why they are not two different qualities.
Six qualities, each with a line across it. The word you choose says which side of the line you are claiming.
Six described behaviours. Both the calibrated word and the excessive one are on the table — pick the one the description actually supports.
Terms
Definitions
Three chains. Name what would count as excess before you name the word — and once, find that nothing does.
Chain 1
The paragraph so far: The chair set out her position, was shown two independent evaluations reaching the opposite conclusion, restated her position unchanged, and did not refer to either evaluation.
Candidates: firm / dogmatic
Step 1 — What in that sentence establishes an excess rather than a quality?
Step 2 — Therefore the expert writes: Her handling of the evaluations was .
Chain 2
The paragraph so far: The negotiator opened high, refused three offers, and settled at a figure close to her opening. Her counterpart, an experienced buyer, matched her at every stage and later described the process as satisfactory.
Candidates: assertive / aggressive
Step 1 — What would you need to show before the critical word becomes available?
Step 2 — Therefore the expert writes: Her approach throughout was .
Chain 3
The paragraph so far: Told that a design flaw had been found, the department issued a statement criticising the tone of the report, named the engineer who had raised it, and addressed none of the findings.
Candidates: immature / aloof
Step 1 — Is the problem too much distance, or a response the situation required and did not get?
Step 2 — Therefore the expert writes: The department's response was .