One conversation between people who know each other
Part 2 uses one conversation of about one and a half to two minutes. The two speakers might be coworkers, teammates, neighbours, friends, or family members. The exchange is conversational and polite, but it is not empty chat. They have a reason for talking: to coordinate a plan, discuss work, share news, or decide what to do.
After the recording, five questions appear one at a time. You hear each question, read four choices, and have 30 seconds to answer. You cannot return to an earlier question. As in Parts 1 and 3, the question order broadly follows the order of information in the recording.
Facts inside a relationship
A detail question may ask when the speakers will meet or why one person cannot follow the original plan. A general-meaning question may ask what they are mainly discussing. Inference questions often depend on how one speaker responds: relief after a solution, disappointment hidden behind polite wording, or hesitation before agreeing.
The relationship helps you interpret what is left unsaid. Two coworkers may refer to “the usual room” without explaining it. Friends may tease each other or make a plan with very few formal details. This shared context is part of the meaning, but the answer still has to be supported by the recording.
Give each speaker a small profile
- Set the relationship.Write two initials and a quick label such as coworkers, neighbours, or teammates. Add the place if the introduction gives one.
- Find the reason for talking.What are they trying to arrange, explain, report, or change?
- Track KNOW, WANT, CHANGE.Note what each speaker already knows, what each one wants, and any new fact that changes the plan.
- Mark feeling with evidence.Use a short word such as relieved or unsure only when wording, stress, or intonation supports it.
- Finish with the outcome.Write the final time, place, action, or understanding reached by the end of the conversation.
A two-column page is enough. Put one speaker on each side and keep a narrow line at the bottom for the final plan. If both people agree to something, write it once at the bottom instead of copying it into both columns.
Notice why the plan changes
This original written rehearsal is shorter than a CELPIP recording. Read it once, cover it, and answer from your notes.
Priya and Joel are coworkers preparing a display for the staff open house. Priya planned to meet Joel in the supply room after lunch to assemble it. Joel says the new display panels arrived early, but the largest panel will not fit in the elevator. He sounds annoyed because delivery staff left it in the lobby. Priya first suggests carrying it up the stairs. Joel reminds her that building staff do not allow large items in the stairwell during office hours. Priya then calls the facilities desk. They agree to assemble the display in the lobby at 4:30, after the public entrance closes. Joel says that is actually easier because the display will be used there the next morning.
Notes: coworkers / open-house display · supply room after lunch × · big panel stuck lobby · stairs × rule · facilities call · build lobby 4:30 ✓ · Joel relieved: display stays there
QuestionWhy does Joel prefer the final arrangement?
- The delivery staff will return to move the panel.
- The display is needed in the lobby the next day.
- The supply room is unavailable after lunchtime.
- The facilities desk will assemble the display.
Evidence path: Joel says the lobby arrangement is easier because the completed display will be used there the next morning. The delivery staff and facilities desk do not agree to assemble it, and the supply room is not described as unavailable. B is the best answer.
What gets missed in familiar conversation
- Treating the exchange as casual noise. The opening sounds friendly, so the learner misses the actual purpose of the call or conversation.
- Combining the two speakers. A reason given by one person is later assigned to the other.
- Keeping the original plan. The notes record the first time or place but not the new information that changes it.
- Naming a feeling from one word. The learner chooses “angry” because a speaker mentions a problem, although the tone shows mild disappointment or relief.
- Overreading politeness. “That might be difficult” can function as a refusal, not uncertainty about whether the difficulty exists.
- Waiting for exact wording. The answer paraphrases “I can drop it off on my way home” as “deliver it after work,” and the learner rejects it because the words differ.
Infer from the whole response
Speaker A: “I could bring the folding chairs tonight, but my car is at the garage.”
Speaker B: “Don’t worry about it. Maya lives across from the hall, and she already offered to bring hers over before the meeting.”
How does Speaker B most likely feel about the missing chairs?
- Concerned because the meeting may be cancelled
- Annoyed that Speaker A forgot the chairs
- Confused about where the meeting will be held
- Unworried because another arrangement is ready
Reveal the answer
D. “Don’t worry” and Maya’s existing offer show that Speaker B already has a workable alternative. Nothing suggests cancellation, blame, or confusion about the venue.
Check the relationship and the outcome
- Did I identify how the speakers know each other?
- Could I state why they were talking in one sentence?
- Did my notes keep each person’s knowledge, preference, and reason separate?
- Did I mark the fact that changed the original plan?
- For a feeling or attitude answer, could I name the words or vocal cue that supported it?
- Did I record the final plan rather than the first suggestion?