Precis Writing: Worked Examples

The mistake on this passage. Candidates keep the list of subjects, because it is vivid, and then have no room for the last sentence, which is the point of the whole passage. The rule is: when you must choose between an illustration and a conclusion, the conclusion stays.

Passage two: punctuality

The passage. 163 words. Target: about 54.

Punctuality is a habit that is very easily praised and very rarely practised. Most people agree in theory that a person who keeps others waiting is taking something from them which cannot be given back, namely their time. Yet in practice lateness is treated as a small fault, and the person who arrives half an hour after the appointed hour offers an excuse about the traffic and is forgiven. The consequences, however, are not small. In a court, an advocate who is late may find the matter has been called and dismissed for default. In a hospital, a surgeon who is late may find that the delay has cost a life. In an office, the work of twenty people may be held up because one has not arrived. The habit is worth forming for a simpler reason as well. A person who is known to be punctual is trusted in other matters too, because punctuality is the outward sign of an ordered mind.

The essential points.

1. Punctuality is praised and rarely practised.
2. In theory, keeping others waiting takes irrecoverable time from them.
3. In practice lateness is excused as trivial.
4. Its consequences are not trivial: three examples, court, hospital, office.
5. A second reason: the punctual are trusted generally, punctuality being a sign of an ordered mind.

The judgment this passage tests. Point 4 is three examples, and the rule says cut examples. But here the examples are the argument: the writer's whole case is that the consequences are serious, and a precis that says only "the consequences are serious" has kept the claim and lost the proof. The solution is to compress all three into one clause of about a dozen words rather than to cut them. Knowing when an example is doing the work of an argument is the hardest judgment in precis writing.

The model precis.

Title: The Cost of Being Late

Punctuality is universally praised and seldom practised. People accept that keeping others waiting takes time that cannot be restored, yet excuse lateness as trivial. Its consequences are serious: a matter may be dismissed for default, a surgeon's delay may cost a life, one absentee may halt twenty workers. The punctual are also trusted generally, punctuality showing an ordered mind.

(59 words)

Note the compressions. "In a court, an advocate who is late may find the matter has been called and dismissed for default" (twenty words) becomes "a matter may be dismissed for default" (seven). "The work of twenty people may be held up because one has not arrived" becomes "one absentee may halt twenty workers".

Passage three: reading and listening

The passage. 156 words. Target: about 52.

Reading and listening are both ways of receiving what another person has to say, but they are not equally within our control. When we listen, the speaker sets the pace. We cannot ask him to go slower, and if our attention wanders for a moment the sentence is gone. When we read, the pace is ours. We may stop at the end of a difficult sentence and consider it, go back a page, or put the book down and return to it a week later. This is why a difficult argument is nearly always better read than heard, and why students who follow a lecture perfectly well often find that they have carried away very little of it. The lecture moved at its own speed and left no trace. The remedy is not to give up lectures but to read afterwards what was heard, so that the ear introduces the subject and the eye masters it.

The essential points.

1. Reading and listening both receive another's thoughts, but differ in control.
2. Listening: the speaker sets the pace, and lapses of attention are unrecoverable.
3. Reading: the reader sets the pace, and may pause, go back, or resume later.
4. Therefore difficult arguments are better read than heard.
5. Hence students follow lectures but retain little.
6. The remedy is to read afterwards what was heard.

What this passage tests: person. It is written in the first person plural, "we listen", "our control", "we may stop". Every one of those must go, because a precis is in the third person. This is the passage on which candidates lose the person mark, and it is the easiest mark on the paper to keep.

The model precis.

Title: Reading Against Listening

Reading and listening both receive another's thoughts but differ in control. A listener must follow the speaker's pace, losing whatever inattention costs him, while a reader pauses or returns at will. Difficult arguments are therefore better read than heard, which explains why students follow lectures easily yet retain little. The remedy is reading afterwards what was heard.

(57 words)

What was cut and why. "Go back a page, or put the book down and return to it a week later" is illustration of point 3 and is compressed to "pauses or returns at will". "The lecture moved at its own speed and left no trace" repeats point 2 and goes. The final clause about the ear and the eye is an ornament restating point 6 and goes, though a candidate who keeps it in place of something less essential will not be penalised.

Passage four: the village council

The passage. 170 words. Target: about 57.

The village council in ancient India settled most disputes without any writing at all. Five respected men of the locality heard the parties, questioned the witnesses whom they usually knew personally, and gave a decision on the same day. The system had obvious merits. It was quick, it cost nothing, and it was conducted in a language the parties spoke. It had equally obvious defects. The judges were neighbours of the parties and might be related to one of them; the poorest villagers had no voice in choosing them; and there was no record, so that the same dispute could be raised again a generation later with no means of proving what had been decided. Modern courts were built to cure those defects, and they have cured them, but at a price which is now familiar: delay, expense, and a language which many litigants do not understand. The movement for alternative dispute resolution is in one sense an attempt to recover the merits of the old system without its faults.

The essential points.

1. Ancient village councils settled disputes orally, five men deciding the same day.
2. Merits: quick, free, in the parties' own language.
3. Defects: judges were neighbours or relatives; the poor had no voice in choosing them; no record, so disputes could revive.
4. Modern courts cured those defects, at the price of delay, expense and unfamiliar language.
5. Alternative dispute resolution seeks the old merits without the old faults.

What this passage tests: structure. It is built as a balance, merits against defects, then the modern cure and its own price. A precis that keeps the balance reads as an argument; a precis that lists facts in the order they appear, without the "but", reads as a paragraph of notes. Keep the connectives: but, therefore, at the cost of.

The model precis.

Title: From Village Council to Modern Court

Ancient Indian village councils settled disputes orally, five respected men deciding the same day. The system was quick, free and in the parties' language, but its judges were neighbours or relatives, the poor could not choose them, and without records decided disputes revived. Modern courts cured these faults, but brought delay, expense and unfamiliar language, which alternative dispute resolution seeks to avoid.

(62 words)

And a note for a law student. This passage is worth reading twice for its content as well as its form. Alternative dispute resolution is a subject of the third semester of this course, and the argument summarised here, that speed, cost and language are the three grievances against formal adjudication, is the argument on which the whole subject rests.

The four traps, collected

Passage one: the illustration crowding out the conclusion. When space runs short, keep the conclusion.

Passage two: examples that are the argument. Compress them, do not cut them.

Passage three: person. First and second person must be converted to third.

Passage four: connectives. Keep but, therefore, at the cost of. Without them a precis becomes notes.

And the fifth, which applies to all four. The word count in brackets at the end. It costs three seconds and it tells the examiner you understood the exercise.

A worked answer

Question, February 2026, six marks. "Make a precis of the following passage and give a suitable title."

The full answer for passage one, exactly as it should appear in the answer book.

Title: Why a Lawyer Must Read Widely

The saying that law is a jealous mistress is partly true, since its study and practice demand unusual attention, but wrong in suggesting a lawyer need know nothing else. Law concerns all human life, and a mind confined to statutes serves it badly. Great advocates read widely, gaining an understanding of motive that persuades courts more than remembered rules.

(59 words)

Nothing else. No introduction, no note explaining what you have done, no apology for the length. Title, precis, count.

Quick revision

Target length is a third, with about ten per cent tolerance, and the count goes in brackets at the end.

Method: read twice, one-sentence central idea, mark the points, count and divide, draft from the marks, adjust, title, fair copy.

Cut illustration before conclusion; compress examples that carry the argument rather than deleting them; convert every first and second person to the third; keep the connectives that show the shape of the argument.

The title is a separate mark and takes five seconds.

Test yourself

1. A passage of 168 words is set. What is the safe range for your precis? About 56 words, with roughly ten per cent either way, so anything from about 50 to 62 is safe. Write the actual count in brackets at the end.

2. When should an example not be cut? When it is doing the work of the argument rather than merely illustrating a point already made, as in the punctuality passage, where the writer's whole case is that the consequences are serious and the three instances are the proof. Compress such examples into a single clause instead of deleting them.

3. Which passage above tests person, and what has to change? The third, on reading and listening, which is written in the first person plural throughout. Every "we", "our" and "us" must be converted to the third person, so that "when we listen, the speaker sets the pace" becomes "a listener must follow the speaker's pace".

4. Why must connectives be kept? Because they carry the structure of the argument. A precis of the village council passage that omits the contrast between merits and defects, and the price at which modern courts cured those defects, states the same facts but no longer reproduces the writer's reasoning, and reads as notes rather than prose.

5. What exactly should appear in the answer book? The title, the precis as one continuous paragraph, and the word count in brackets. Nothing else: no introduction, no explanation of the method, and no comment on the passage.