<p>testtaker do you have the answers for the natural science passage too. BTW, i agree with you about being argumentative, but that question really is highly debatable and shouldn’t have been on the test.</p>
<p>testtaker, I can read English perfectly fine. I don’t get why you don’t understand the difference between informative and argumentative. Maybe you should try taking a more rigorous English class.</p>
<p>Once again, tell me why informative isn’t correct. You have a burden to do so by telling me my answer isn’t correct.</p>
<p>Was natural science the grasshopper one? I got these answers, in no particular order:
Insects in groups who are toxic
Grasshoppers become toxic because of their diet
Other animals use their colors as warning signals
To show that scientific progress can be made through unorthodox methods (debatable, a lot of people are thinking this was contrast)
Green</p>
<p>I don’t remember the rest</p>
<p>testtaker, I agree with all of your answers.</p>
<p>relativelysmart, I understand the difference between informative and argumentative. But just look at the title of the passage. “What are independent book stores good for? Not much.” Sounds like an argument to me</p>
<p>really there is no clear answer, the author does not really take a firm side (no clear thesis), however he refutes the ideas about indies in almost every paragraph. Also if you read the online article he says: “I confess I am not inclined to grant culture-changing status to the indies too quickly”, showing the article is not completely objective. And the title does suggest an argument.</p>
<p>on the last question of reading, the one about darwin, did you say it weakens darwins belief or something like that?</p>
<p>^ Yeah I put that</p>
<p>I know there was one question on the Hawaii passage that referred to the line “forgotten because they were brown” or something like that. Anybody remember that question?</p>
<p>What did you guys get for the first question of the Hawaii passage? It was about what the passage is about kind of. It was either C or D. It was like talking to relatives or envisioning</p>
<p>it was envisioning (picturing) the relatives</p>
<p>Tell me if you guys agree with my answers to the book stores passage:
Argumentative (obviously debatable)
By political arena she meant she thought the rise of superstore book sellers damaged the political process (I’m 90% sure this is wrong, I have no idea why I put it)
The emergence of online book sellers prevents superstore book sellers from raising their prices (also unsure about this)</p>
<p>I don’t remember the other questions, but I was really shaky on this passage for some reason. I feel like I missed a decent number of them.</p>
<p>Does anyone remember if envisioning was answer C or answer D?</p>
<p>I did not get that for the political arena and online book sellers one, but i forgot what i put, do you remember the other options.
omgitsvicki, i think it was C but im unsure.</p>
<p>can you elaborate on the one where it says “weakens darwin’s beliefs” for the last question of the last passage? I think i put that, im just not sure what the other choices were.</p>
<p>Ah, I understand now testtaker. Thanks for explaining. </p>
<p>Also, I didn’t get the political process one either. I don’t remember the other answer choices though.</p>
<p>hereforthelinks, all i remember is that the passage was talking about how caterpillars are bright and darwin thought this was to help mating, but actually it could have been for protection from predators. i dont know the other choices</p>
<p>The passage was definitely argumentative.
The answer choice for informative was along the lines of “Informative about indie book stores” - It did NOT just talk about indies, it devoted a significant amount of time to superstores as well. This answer choice simply does not make sense when you consider the whole statement.
No, I most certainly don’t. Every single English teacher I have ever had has drilled into my head those phrases are NEVER acceptable in formal writing (formal writing is in the third person only, never first person), especially argumentative essay. In a high-quality piece of writing, you are not going to find such obvious clues showing that it’s argumentative, you have to dig down deeper and analyze more subtle clues like tone and diction.<br>
The point of an argumentative essay is to show that one point of view is worth considering, not that that point of view is the ONLY point of view. As such, it makes sense that both/multiple sides of the argument are presented. See link below.
That’s persuasive writing, not argumentative. Again, the point of argumentative writing is to show that one idea is worth considering / plausible, which does not required a call to action. <a href=“Multnomah Education Service District - About Multnomah Education Service District”>Multnomah Education Service District - About Multnomah Education Service District;
That title makes it clear as day the author has an opinion on the topic.
superstore sales assistant had never heard of the Village Voice.
The tone and diction of show the author has a negative view of those that prefer Indies. flooded with lamentations definitely has negative connotation.
Again with the negative connotation. Someone that is unbiased does not use describe one side of the argument as having a self conscious desire and certainly does not make slightly condescending comments like or to seem to. The diction provides subtle hints that he is NOT 100% objective, which is a requirement for informative writing.
Again, an unbiased, informative writing does not contain statements like these. ploy, segregate, and artificially all have negative connotation. There are not similar phrases with negative connotation for superstores, making it clear the author has a preference. </p>
<p>
Looky here, a statement that meets the EXACT definition of argumentative writing. He is not saying superstores are amazing and indies should be abolished (persuasive writing) but making it clear his argument is worth just as much consideration as the others. 7</p>
<p>
Here is the author making a clear claim, again, that his view is worth consideration. The author claiming the benefits of my view arent easily seen, but are rather extensive and awesome has argumentative writing all over it. Its essentially the trademark of argumentative writing.
The short version of this statement: The other guys argument was perfect several decades ago, but times have changed and mine is just worthy now. Again, very indicative of argumentative writing. </p>
<p>If you notice subtle clues, its pretty clear that this piece is argumentative. The tone/diction/connotation show the author is biased an informative author would not be. Considering both sides and stating his is worth considering shows its argumentative a persuasive paper would go much farther and state its the ONLY plausible viewpoint.</p>
<p>I put the online book sellers prevent superstore book sellers from raising prices because it said something about how the online book sellers kept the major book selling corporations out of reach.</p>
<p>baileyj57 tl;dr lol.</p>