Report what is claimed without taking the blame for it. Learn the grammar of distance.
By C1 you already handle the ordinary passive. The advanced skill is different: it is using the passive to report what people say, think and claim while keeping yourself, the writer, at a careful distance. This is the grammar of the news report, the academic essay and the cautious school announcement — the grammar that lets you present a claim as a claim, not as a fact you personally guarantee.
Two engines drive this unit. The impersonal report — It is thought / believed / claimed / reported that... — opens with an empty it and states the view without naming who holds it. The personal report — She is thought to know... / He is said to have left... — lifts the subject to the front and follows it with a to-infinitive. Master the switch between them, add a perfect infinitive for earlier events, and you gain the objective, non-committal tone that marks writing as unmistakably C1.
The impersonal pattern begins with a "dummy" subject it, a passive reporting verb, and a full that-clause. Because no one is named as the source, the writer reports the idea while distancing themselves from it. This is the workhorse of academic and journalistic prose: It is thought that..., It is widely believed that..., It has been claimed that...
| Pattern | What it signals | Example |
|---|---|---|
| It is said/thought that + clause | a general, unattributed belief | It is thought that short bursts of revision improve recall. |
| It is reported/claimed that + clause | a news claim the writer won't guarantee | It is reported that the school trip has been cancelled. |
| It was believed/alleged that + clause | the same, set in the past | It was believed that the disease spread by air. |
The personal pattern fronts the subject and follows a passive reporting verb with a to-infinitive — never a that-clause. Use to + base when the reported situation is at the same time as the report, and to have + V3 when it is earlier. This is where most C1 errors live, so learn the two shapes precisely.
| Form | Time relation | Example |
|---|---|---|
| is said to + base | same time as the report (state/habit) | She is said to hold three school records. |
| is said to be + -ing | happening now, in progress | He is believed to be studying abroad. |
| is said to have + V3 | earlier than the report | They are said to have left for the exchange programme. |
The same two patterns work with a wide family of reporting verbs — expect, know, understand, allege, report, consider, presume — and in the past tense. When the reporting verb is past, the perfect infinitive still marks an even earlier event. The passive is chosen precisely because it lets you drop the agent: you need not say who alleged or expected anything.
| Pattern | Nuance | Example |
|---|---|---|
| was alleged to + base | a past accusation, source withheld | He was alleged to be the ringleader behind the prank. |
| was alleged to have + V3 | a past accusation about an earlier act | She was alleged to have leaked the exam paper. |
| is expected/understood to + base | a cautious present forecast or reading | Turnout is expected to rise sharply. |
Alongside the be-passive, informal English uses get + V3. The get-passive is more dynamic and often carries a nuance of something sudden, accidental or unfortunate happening to the subject — frequently beyond their control. It belongs to speech and lighter registers, not to the most formal academic prose.
| Get-passive | Nuance | Example |
|---|---|---|
| got caught | sudden, unfortunate, to the subject | He got caught cheating in the final. |
| got injured / got lost | an accident, unplanned | Three players got injured during the match. |
| get picked / get chosen | a change the subject undergoes | She finally got chosen as team captain last month. |
Reporting structures are a writer's main tool for objectivity. Instead of committing to a fact, you frame it as reported, expected or alleged — and you drop the agent so no single person is named. This is how academics and journalists stay cautious and fair. Choosing the right frame is a matter of how much you are willing to vouch for.
| You want to... | Reach for | Example |
|---|---|---|
| state a shared view neutrally | It is generally agreed that... | It is generally agreed that the plan failed. |
| report an unverified accusation | is alleged to have... | The club is alleged to have hidden the missing funds. |
| forecast cautiously | is expected / is likely to... | Turnout is expected to reach a record. |
These are the errors that still surface in otherwise strong C1 writing. Each is a reporting slip, not just a form slip. Audit every report you write against these rows.
| Wrong ✗ | Right ✓ | Why? |
|---|---|---|
| He is said that he speaks six languages. | He is said to speak six languages. | the personal report takes a to-infinitive, never "that". |
| She is believed to left the country. | She is believed to have left the country. | an earlier event needs the perfect infinitive "to have + V3". |
| It is thought the plan to be risky. | It is thought that the plan is risky. | the impersonal "it" pattern needs a full that-clause. |
| The culprit was got caught at once. | The culprit got caught at once. | there is no "was got"; use "got" or the be-passive "was caught". |
| Teachers are expected the grades to fall. | Grades are expected to fall. | in the passive report the object is promoted to subject. |
The editor of the school newspaper and a student reporter argue over how to word a breaking story about the science club. Read it twice and watch the reporting choices work as a system: an impersonal report for an unattributed claim, a personal report with a perfect infinitive for an earlier act, a passive to withhold the source, and a get-passive for the sudden misfortune.
Choose the correct answer. — 10 questions, each one is marked instantly. Questions get harder as you go.
Learn the words of attribution and evidence, then report a contested claim of your own.
Report a contested claim — a school rumour, a science-fair dispute, a debate about a new discovery, a piece of playground gossip. Write 8 sentences and use at least 8 of the words above. Make your reporting structures do real work.
Sentence starters (you can begin with these):
Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will review your task.)
Read the feature, then work through the five tasks.
Skilled readers prepare before they start. Before you read, think about these three questions (you do not need to write the answers):
Words to spot (from the Speaking section): allege · corroborate · substantiate · disseminate · ostensibly · hearsay · unsubstantiated · scrutinise
For decades, the ruins beneath the desert plateau have been claimed to be the remains of a legendary trading capital. When the discovery was first announced, it was reported around the world as one of the great finds of the century. Recently, however, the claim has been called into question, and the site is now said to be at the centre of a bitter academic dispute.
At first, the announcement was greeted with something close to euphoria. Photographs of the half-buried walls are said to have circulated within hours, and the story is thought to have been shared by millions of people before a single expert had verified it. Within months the case had found its way onto reading lists and into classroom debates, where teenagers were asked to weigh the competing versions for themselves. For many of them it was the first time a piece of apparently settled history had been presented not as a fact to be memorised but as a claim to be tested. Teachers are reported to have seized on the story precisely because it modelled how knowledge is actually made: provisionally, argumentatively, and always open to revision. One history department is even said to have built an entire term around the controversy, inviting students to act as rival panels of assessors and to defend their verdicts with evidence rather than enthusiasm.
The lead archaeologist is believed to have identified the city from a single inscription. It is thought that the carving names a ruler mentioned in ancient chronicles; consequently, the team argued, the settlement must be the lost capital itself. The interpretation was widely disseminated before it had been independently checked.
The reasoning behind the identification deserves to be examined closely rather than accepted on trust. According to the team, the inscription is said to contain a royal name and a place-name that appear together in only one surviving chronicle; from this coincidence they inferred that the ruins could be nothing other than the fabled capital. It is claimed that the letter-forms match those of the period, and the lead archaeologist is reported to have described the correspondence as "unmistakable". Supporters maintain that such a convergence of clues could hardly be accidental, and that to dismiss it out of hand would be needlessly cynical. Yet even sympathetic readers concede that the entire edifice of the argument rests on a single weathered slab of stone. A lone misreading, they admit, would be enough to bring the whole structure down, and it is precisely this fragility that has made the claim so easy to attack.
Critics are far less convinced. The inscription, they allege, is ostensibly royal but may in fact have been added centuries later. Whereas the original report presented the identification as certain, rival scholars insist that it has never been corroborated. One specialist is said to have dismissed the evidence as "hearsay dressed up as history."
The critics' case, once it is set out patiently, turns out to be more technical than sensational. They point out that the layer in which the inscription was found has never been securely dated, and that the carving could, on their reading, have been added long after the settlement itself was abandoned. The style of the lettering, they allege, is ostensibly archaic yet betrays flourishes unknown before a much later age. When a group of senior students re-examined the published photographs for a history project, several of them are said to have arrived at the same uncomfortable conclusion: that the decisive sign was simply too eroded to be read with any real confidence. Their teacher used the exercise to demonstrate how quickly a confident caption can outrun the evidence beneath it, and how a claim can be disseminated far faster than it can ever be checked.
Part of what makes the affair such a rich teaching example is the very language in which it has been reported. Almost nothing about the site is stated as plain fact; instead, readers are told what is believed, what is alleged, and what has yet to be substantiated. Students quickly notice that this cautious phrasing is not mere timidity but a deliberate ethical choice, a way of passing on a claim without personally vouching for it. In one memorable lesson, a class is said to have rewritten a sensational headline in careful, hedged prose, only to watch the story shrink from a triumphant certainty into a modest possibility. The exercise, their teacher argued, taught them to read the news of any discipline more warily, and to ask of every bold assertion a single stubborn question: has this actually been corroborated, or merely repeated?
What happens next is being followed with unusual interest, not least by the schools that adopted the story. A fresh survey of the plateau is expected to be conducted using ground-penetrating radar, and the original inscription is to be re-photographed under raking light so that every groove can be scrutinised in turn. Should the reading hold, the team's boldness will have been vindicated and the textbooks quietly rewritten in its favour. Should it collapse, the episode is likely to be remembered as a cautionary tale about the seductive power of a good narrative. Either way, the students who first encountered the case in a classroom will have learned something more durable than any single date or dynasty: that a claim, however thrilling, counts for little until it has been corroborated, and that healthy scepticism is not the enemy of wonder but its most dependable guardian.
The dispute matters because reputations and funding depend on it. The findings are expected to be re-examined by an independent panel next year, and every claim will be scrutinised in detail. Notwithstanding the doubts, the excavation continues, and further inscriptions are believed to have been buried nearby. Nonetheless, until the central claim can be substantiated, the "lost city" is likely to remain, in one critic's words, a story that was told before it was proven.
Choose the correct answer.
Are these sentences true or false, according to the text?
Complete each sentence with ONE word from the text. Mind the reporting structure (been / to / is / have).
Write your answer in your own words. These questions are not marked automatically.
1. Why does the writer use so many reporting structures ("it is thought", "is believed to have") instead of stating the discovery as a fact?
2. What is the difference between the way the original report and the critics treat the inscription?
3. The article ends by calling it "a story that was told before it was proven." What do you think this means?
Find these connectors in the text — each one appears at least once: however, consequently, whereas, notwithstanding, nonetheless, because, before, until. (You will reuse these same C1 connectors in the Writing section.) Note them down, then check.
Rewrite a blunt, committed account into cautious reported speech, then drill the structures with 10 quick questions.
Below is a blunt account that states everything as fact and names names. In a courtroom or a serious newspaper this would be reckless. Your job is to re-tell it cautiously, turning each committed statement into a reported, distanced one.
Sentence starters (you can begin with these):
Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will review your task.)
10 quick questions on advanced passive and reporting. Each one is marked instantly. Questions get harder as you go.
Write and submit an objective report on a contested claim; your teacher will review it.
At B2 you linked ideas with however, therefore, although, whereas. At C1 you gain a sharper, more formal register with connectors such as moreover, consequently, notwithstanding, whereas and nonetheless. In a balanced report they let you weigh a claim against its counter-evidence without ever sounding partisan.
| Connector | Use it to... | Example |
|---|---|---|
| moreover | add a stronger, further point | The source is anonymous. Moreover, the claim is unproven. |
| consequently | state a formal result or effect | No proof was offered; consequently, the report was retracted. |
| notwithstanding | concede "in spite of" (very formal) | Notwithstanding the doubts, the study was published. |
| whereas | draw a direct contrast between two ideas | Supporters call it certain, whereas critics call it hearsay. |
| nonetheless | say "even so", after a concession | The claim is disputed; nonetheless, it is still cited. |
| however | contrast between two sentences | The story spread fast. However, it was never verified. |
See the difference — the same claim, written two ways:
| Committed & reckless ✗ | Reported & balanced C1 ✓ |
|---|---|
| The treasurer took the funds. The captain helped her. They deleted the records. The trip fell through because of them. | The treasurer is alleged to have taken the funds, and it is claimed that the captain assisted her. The records are said to have been deleted; consequently, the trip fell through. Notwithstanding these claims, nothing has yet been corroborated. |
A strong C1 report does not blurt out a verdict. It presents a claim as reported, weighs the evidence for and against it, and reaches a cautious conclusion — all while keeping the writer's own voice measured and fair. The skeleton stays the same; you change the content, not the shape:
| Part | What to write | Structures to reach for |
|---|---|---|
| 1. The claim | state what is claimed, source withheld | It is claimed / believed that... ; is said to be... |
| 2. The case for | report the supporting argument | is thought to have... ; is expected to... |
| 3. The case against | report the doubts and counter-evidence | is alleged to... ; has not been corroborated |
| 4. Cautious verdict | reach a measured, hedged conclusion | until it is substantiated... ; is likely to remain... |
Write a balanced report on a contested claim — a scientific controversy, a school or sports scandal, a historical dispute, or a claim you have read about. Report it like a serious journalist or academic: attribute nothing you cannot prove, and keep your own judgement measured.
Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will evaluate your writing.)
Mixed questions from the whole unit, then check what you can do.
14 questions: grammar + vocabulary + reading + practice. Each question is marked instantly.
Tick what you can do now. Honest answers help your teacher.
İşaretlemediğin madde varsa ilgili bölüme dönüp tekrar çalış — soldaki menüden her bölüme geri dönebilirsin.
Oturum kontrol ediliyor...