Say "yes, but" like an educated speaker: concede a point, then contrast it with precision.
At B2 you no longer join ideas with a string of but and and. You learn to concede a point — to admit that something is true — and then turn it against a stronger idea. This is the language of essays, reports and serious discussion, and it makes you sound balanced and in control.
This unit gathers the whole family of concession and contrast links: the prepositions despite / in spite of, the conjunctions although / even though / though, the comparison words whereas / while, and the formal linking adverbs however, nevertheless, nonetheless and on the other hand. The single skill that ties them together is knowing what follows each one — a noun, an -ing form, or a full clause.
These two mean exactly the same thing ("in spite of that"). They are prepositions, so they are never followed by a full clause on their own. Three things can follow them: a noun, an -ing form, or the phrase the fact that + clause.
| What follows | Pattern | Example |
|---|---|---|
| a noun | despite / in spite of + noun | Despite the delay, we caught the train. |
| an -ing form | despite / in spite of + V-ing | In spite of feeling ill, she finished the race. |
| a full clause | despite / in spite of + the fact that + clause | Despite the fact that he was tired, he kept going. |
These are conjunctions, so each one introduces a full clause (subject + verb). They mean the same as despite, but the grammar after them is different — a clause, not a noun.
| Connector | Force / position | Example |
|---|---|---|
| although | neutral; most common in writing | Although the film was long, nobody left. |
| even though | stronger, more emphatic | She stayed calm even though she was furious. |
| though | informal; can also end a sentence | It was expensive. I bought it, though. |
Use whereas and while to set two facts side by side and highlight the difference between them. Both parts of the sentence are usually true; you are not conceding a point, you are comparing.
These are linking adverbs, not conjunctions. They connect two separate sentences, and they usually start the second sentence, followed by a comma. They belong to formal, written English.
| Adverb | Meaning | Example |
|---|---|---|
| however | "but" (formal contrast) | The offer was generous. However, we declined it. |
| nevertheless / nonetheless | "in spite of that" | The risks were high. Nevertheless, she invested. |
| on the other hand | introduces the opposite side | Cars are convenient. On the other hand, they pollute. |
To say that something stays true whatever the degree, use no matter how or however in front of an adjective or adverb. They mean "it does not matter how much".
These are the errors B2 students still make with concession links. Check your own writing against every row.
| Wrong ✗ | Right ✓ | Why? |
|---|---|---|
| Despite it was raining, we walked. | Although it was raining, we walked. | despite cannot take a clause; use although, or "despite the fact that". |
| Despite of the noise, I slept. | Despite the noise, I slept. | no "of" after despite (only after "in spite"). |
| Although the traffic, we were late. | Despite the traffic, we were late. | although needs a clause; before a noun use despite. |
| I like tea whereas I don't like coffee, because it's bitter. | I like tea, whereas I dislike coffee. | whereas is contrast, not a reason ("because"). |
| It was hard, however we finished. | It was hard; however, we finished. | a linking adverb needs a full stop or semicolon before it. |
Two colleagues debate whether to accept a new project. Read it twice and watch how each concession link connects to what follows: a noun after despite, a clause after even though, a comparison with whereas, and a linking adverb with however.
Choose the correct answer. — 10 questions, each one is marked instantly. Questions get harder as you go.
Learn the words, then use them to argue a case fairly — concede a point, then make yours.
Choose a debatable topic (e.g. city vs country life, phones at school, online vs classroom learning). Write 8 sentences weighing both sides. Use at least 8 of the words above.
Sentence starters (you can begin with these):
Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will review your task.)
Read the text, then answer the questions.
Good 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): drawback · compromise · trade-off · offset · mitigate · concede · disparity · on balance
Ecotourism promises to protect nature while letting travellers enjoy it. Despite this green image, however, the reality is more complicated. Although the idea sounds simple, balancing profit and protection is anything but easy.
The word itself is fairly young. It first appeared in the 1980s, when biologists and travel companies began to notice that ordinary mass tourism was steadily destroying the very landscapes that visitors had crossed the world to see. Coral reefs were being broken by careless divers, mountain paths were turning into dusty scars, and coastal villages were disappearing behind rows of concrete hotels. Out of this concern grew a new promise: travel that leaves a place as healthy as it was found, or even a little healthier. In theory, tourists would pay to experience wild nature, and that payment would give local people a reason to guard it. In practice, that neat circle has proved far harder to close than its early supporters imagined.
On the positive side, ecotourism can fund conservation. In many rainforests, the money that tourists pay protects trees that would otherwise be cut down. Even though logging is often more profitable in the short term, some communities now choose tourism, whereas twenty years ago they saw the forest only as timber. Moreover, visitors who watch wildlife closely tend to care about it, and that concern often lasts long after they fly home.
Costa Rica is often held up as the classic example. Half a century ago, farmers there were clearing forest as fast as they could, because cattle and coffee paid the bills and standing trees paid nothing. Today, whole regions earn far more from birdwatchers, hikers and photographers than they ever earned from timber, and roughly a quarter of the country is now protected in some form. A guide named Mateo, who grew up hunting in the hills above his village, put the change simply. “When I was young,” he said, “a live monkey was worth nothing to my family, and a cut tree was worth a week’s food. Now a single group of tourists pays me to show them that same monkey, and they come back every season. So I protect the forest — not because a law tells me to, but because it feeds my children.” Stories like his suggest that conservation lasts longest when it makes economic sense to the people who live closest to the land.
There is a subtler benefit too. Travellers who spend a week walking quietly through a wetland, learning the names of frogs and following the tracks of a jaguar, rarely return home unchanged. They tell friends, they support charities, and some even change how they vote. In this way a small lodge in a remote valley can influence attitudes thousands of kilometres away. Education, in other words, may be one of ecotourism’s most valuable and least visible products.
On the other hand, the drawbacks are real. No matter how careful a company claims to be, large numbers of visitors disturb fragile habitats. Despite strict rules, some tourists still leave rubbish, feed wild animals or frighten them. In spite of good intentions, the flights that carry eco-tourists across the world release enormous amounts of carbon. Thus a holiday designed to celebrate nature may quietly harm it.
The problem often begins with success itself. When a quiet reserve becomes famous, the crowds arrive, and the very features that made it special start to fade. Paths widen and erode; animals that once behaved naturally learn to beg for food or flee from cameras; and the roads, car parks and lodges built to serve visitors eat into the wilderness year by year. A reef that can comfortably host a handful of swimmers may be trampled and bleached once hundreds arrive each day. Nature, unfortunately, does not scale up as neatly as a business plan.
There is also the awkward matter of honesty. Because the label “eco” now attracts customers and often justifies higher prices, some companies simply paint their old products green — a habit critics call “greenwashing”. A hotel may hang a small sign asking guests to reuse their towels, while quietly running heated pools, air-conditioned suites and a fleet of diesel vehicles. Unless independent organisations check these claims and award trustworthy certificates, travellers have little way of telling a genuinely responsible operator from a clever marketing trick. As a result, well-meaning tourists can pay a premium and still, without knowing it, fund the very damage they hoped to avoid.
Critics sometimes ask whether the greenest choice would simply be to stay at home and let wild places rest. It is a fair question, and for the most delicate ecosystems the honest answer may be yes. Yet forests and reefs that earn nothing tend to be cleared, drained or fished into silence, because governments and families under financial pressure protect what pays and sacrifice what does not. Seen in that harsh light, a well-run reserve full of paying visitors is often safer than an empty one that no one has a reason to defend. The choice, in most of the world, is rarely between tourism and untouched wilderness; far more often it lies between careful tourism and outright destruction.
So is ecotourism worth it? Although the concept is far from perfect, most experts argue that responsible tourism still beats the alternative. Nevertheless, they warn that it works only when visitor numbers stay small and the profits genuinely reach local people.
The details of that warning matter enormously. If the money flows straight into the pockets of distant investors, the local community gains little and may come to resent both the tourists and the rules that protect the wildlife. If, however, villagers are trained as guides, rangers and lodge managers, and if a fair share of every ticket stays in the region, then people have a lasting reason to defend their forests and coasts. Careful planning — limiting group sizes, spreading visitors across the seasons, and reinvesting profits in schools, clean water and habitat repair — can turn a risky idea into a genuine engine of conservation. Left unmanaged, the same idea can become just another way of loving a place to death.
On balance, ecotourism is neither a miracle nor a disaster. It is a fragile compromise that must be managed with real care — loaf by loaf, tree by tree.
Choose the correct answer.
Are these sentences true or false, according to the text?
Complete each sentence with ONE connector from the text. Mind the grammar that follows (noun, clause or comparison).
Write your answer in your own words. These questions are not marked automatically.
1. According to the text, how can ecotourism actually protect a rainforest?
2. What is the main drawback of ecotourism that the writer describes?
3. Do you agree that ecotourism is "a fragile compromise"? Why or why not?
Find these connectors in the text — each one appears at least once: despite, although, even though, whereas, however, nevertheless, in spite of, on the other hand. (You will use these same connectors in the Writing section.) Note them down, then check.
Aimee talks to Paul about the weeks he spent volunteering at a rainforest research station.
You will hear a conversation: Aimee asks Paul about volunteering at a rainforest research station in Australia — the invasive trees they controlled and the orphaned fruit bats they cared for. You will listen TWICE. First listen: answer questions 1-5. Second listen: answer questions 6-10. (Kaydı İKİ kez dinleyeceksin: ilk dinlemede 1-5, ikinci dinlemede 6-10.)
Write and submit a balanced paragraph; your teacher will review it.
At B1 you linked ideas with and, but, so, because. At B2, a balanced argument needs the concession family from this unit. The trick is choosing the right one for what comes next — a noun, a clause, or a whole new sentence.
| Connector | Followed by... | Example |
|---|---|---|
| despite / in spite of | a noun or -ing form | Despite the cost, the plan succeeded. |
| although / even though | a full clause | Even though it was risky, we tried. |
| whereas / while | a contrasting clause | Cities are busy, whereas villages are calm. |
| however | a new sentence (; however,) | It is cheap; however, it is slow. |
| nevertheless | a new sentence ("in spite of that") | She lost. Nevertheless, she smiled. |
| on the other hand | the opposite side of an argument | It saves time. On the other hand, it costs more. |
See the difference — the same facts, written two ways:
| Basic linking ✗ | Confident B2 writing ✓ |
|---|---|
| Online learning is cheap. It is flexible. It can feel lonely. Classrooms are social. They cost more. I like online learning. | Online learning is cheap and flexible. Even though it can feel lonely, most students adapt. Despite the higher cost, classrooms offer real contact, whereas online courses rely on a screen. On balance, I still prefer studying online. |
A balanced "for-and-against" paragraph has three parts. The skeleton stays the same — you change the content, not the structure:
| Part | What to write | Example |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Opening | Name the topic and say it has two sides. | Working from home has clear advantages, although it is not for everyone. |
| 2. Body | Give the advantages, then concede the drawbacks with concession links (despite, even though, whereas, however). | It saves commuting time; however, it can blur work and rest. Whereas an office keeps you focused, home is full of distractions. |
| 3. Closing | Weigh both sides and give your view with On balance, ... | On balance, the freedom outweighs the drawbacks for me. |
Write a balanced paragraph that argues for and against a topic you know well — for example: working from home, social media, living in a big city, or banning phones in schools. Present both sides fairly, then give your own view.
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 + listening. 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...