Açılışa Özel %30 İndirim Tüm Materyallerde
Ünite 16 · Cohesion & Discourse Markers · Bölüm 1/6

Grammar: Cohesion & Discourse Markers

Guide the reader from one idea to the next — clearly, and without clutter.

The threads that hold a text together

At C1, a strong text rarely reads as a list of separate sentences. Instead, each sentence leans on the one before it, picking up a thread and passing it on. That quality is called cohesion, and it is built less from grand ideas than from a modest toolkit: words that point back to what came before, words that stand in for a whole phrase, and the discourse markershowever, moreover, nevertheless, consequently — that signal exactly how one thought relates to the next.

This unit treats cohesion as a system. You will learn reference (pronouns and demonstratives such as it, this, these, such, the former, the latter), substitution and ellipsis (one/ones, do so, so/not, and leaving out repeated words), and the families of discourse markers that add, contrast, concede and conclude. Above all you will learn to choose the marker that matches the logical relationship you mean — and to use the right register without smothering your prose in connectors. The goal is a text that flows so smoothly the joins are never noticed.

  • The report raised three concerns. However, it proposed no solutions.Contrast marker → signals that the second idea works against the first.
  • The first design failed, so the studio produced a second one.Substitution → "one" replaces "design" and avoids clumsy repetition.
  • Funding was cut; consequently, the trial was abandoned.Result marker → the second clause is the outcome of the first.
  • The letters were vague. Such writing rarely reassures a client.Reference → "such" points back to the kind of writing just described.

1. Reference (it / this / such / the former / the latter)

The quietest cohesive device is reference: pointing back to something already mentioned instead of repeating it. A pronoun (it, they) or a demonstrative (this, these, such) links a new sentence to an earlier idea, while the former and the latter let you refer back to two things in order. Reference keeps prose economical — but the link must be unambiguous, or the reader loses the thread.

DeviceWhat it points toExample
this / thesea whole idea in the previous sentenceSales fell sharply. This alarmed the board.
such + nounthe kind of thing just describedThe data were patchy. Such gaps weaken any claim.
the former / the latterthe first / second of two named itemsWe can cut costs or raise prices; the former harms morale.
Register & nuance
  • Avoid a "vague this": if this could point to several things, add a noun — "This decline..." ✓ is clearer than a bare "This..."
  • the former / the latter refer to exactly two items, in the order given; with three or more, name them instead.

2. Substitution & ellipsis (one/ones · do so · so/not)

Rather than repeat words, English lets you substitute a short stand-in or omit the repeated part altogether (ellipsis). One/ones replaces a countable noun; do so (or do it/that) replaces a verb phrase; so and not replace a whole clause after verbs like think, hope, believe. Used well, these devices make writing tighter without losing meaning.

DeviceReplacesExample
one / onesa repeated countable nounMy old phone broke, so I bought a new one.
do so / do ita repeated verb phraseShe agreed to revise it and did so at once.
so / nota whole clause (after think, hope...)"Will it work?" — "I believe so." / "I hope not."
C1 subtlety
  • do so is more formal than do it: "The panel was asked to reconvene, and it did so." ✓ suits academic prose.
  • Ellipsis omits only what the reader can recover: "Some passed the test; others [passed the test] failed." ✗ — don't cut a word the reader cannot restore.

3. Additive & adversative markers (moreover · however · nevertheless)

Discourse markers are the most visible cohesive device. One family adds a point in the same direction (moreover, furthermore, in addition); another marks a contrast or a concession against the previous idea (however, by contrast, nevertheless, on the other hand). The skill is to pick the marker whose meaning matches the real relationship between your ideas — a contrast marker where the logic actually continues confuses the reader more than no marker at all.

MarkerRelationshipExample
moreover / furthermoreadds a further point (same direction)The plan is costly. Moreover, it duplicates existing work.
however / by contrastsignals a contrast with the last ideaThe theory is elegant; however, the evidence is thin.
nevertheless / nonethelessconcedes a point, then holds your lineThe sample was small; nevertheless, the trend held.
Register & nuance
  • Nevertheless is stronger than however: it concedes the first point before pushing back, so keep it for genuine concession.
  • These markers usually open a sentence and take a comma: "However, the sample was small." Mid-sentence, use a semicolon before them.

4. Result, sequence & register (consequently · therefore · furthermore vs plus)

A third family draws a result or conclusion (consequently, therefore, thus, as a result); a fourth orders ideas in sequence (first, subsequently, finally). Whichever you choose, match the register: formal markers (furthermore, consequently) suit an essay, while their casual cousins (plus, so, on top of that) belong to speech. Mixing the two jars the reader.

MarkerRelationship / registerExample
consequently / thereforestates a result (formal)The data were limited; therefore, the claim is tentative.
furthermoreadds a point (formal essay)Furthermore, the method has been widely replicated.
plus / on top of thatadds a point (informal speech)It's cheap, plus it's easy to use.
C1 subtlety — match the register
  • In academic writing, prefer furthermore / consequently to plus / so: "Consequently, costs rose." ✓ not "Plus, costs rose." in an essay.
  • Don't overload: use a marker where the link would otherwise be unclear, not on every sentence.

5. Common mistakes (✗ / ✓)

Four errors recur even in otherwise strong C1 writing: choosing a marker whose meaning contradicts the logic, mismatching the register, overloading a paragraph with connectors, and a "vague this" whose reference is unclear. Audit your writing against every row.

Wrong ✗Right ✓Why?
The trial was small; therefore, its results are highly reliable.The trial was small; nevertheless, its results are worth noting.a small trial does not cause reliability; the logic is concession, not result.
The costs rose sharply. Plus, morale collapsed.The costs rose sharply. Moreover, morale collapsed."plus" is conversational; use a formal additive marker in an essay.
Firstly, however, moreover, therefore, the plan may, nevertheless, fail.The plan may nevertheless fail.stacking markers is exhausting; use one where it clarifies the link.
Attendance and funding both fell. This is worrying.Attendance and funding both fell. This decline is worrying.a bare "this" is ambiguous; add a noun so the reference is clear.
Sales rose in spring; moreover, they fell in autumn.Sales rose in spring; however, they fell in autumn.the ideas contrast, so an additive marker sends the wrong signal.

6. Putting it together (Model Dialogue)

Two editors discuss a draft report. Read it twice and watch cohesion work as a system: reference points back, substitution avoids repetition, and each discourse marker signals the exact logical relationship the writer means.

A:Your second paragraph repeats "the proposal" five times — it reads clumsily.Problem: repetition instead of reference/substitution.
B:Fair point. After the first mention I can use "it", and "a cheaper one" for the alternative.Reference (it) + substitution (one) → tighter prose.
A:Here you wrote "moreover" between two clashing ideas — costs up, benefits down.Wrong marker: additive where the logic contrasts.
B:Right — that should be "however", and the result clause needs "consequently".Contrast + result markers matched to the logic.
A:One more: the opening has five connectors in three sentences.Overload: markers on every sentence.
B:Agreed — I'll keep one "nevertheless" where the concession really matters and cut the rest.Use markers sparingly, where they clarify.
Test yourself
  • Why replace "the proposal" with "it" and "one"? (Reference and substitution avoid clumsy repetition and read as more fluent.)
  • Why is "however" better than "moreover" between clashing ideas? (The relationship is contrast, not addition — match the marker to the logic.)
  • Why cut most of the opening connectors? (Too many markers exhaust the reader and stop guiding; use one where it clarifies.)

Exercises (Alıştırmalar)

Choose the correct answer. — 10 questions, each one is marked instantly. Questions get harder as you go.

Ünite 16 · Cohesion & Discourse Markers · Bölüm 2/6

Speaking: Connecting Your Ideas

Learn the vocabulary of cohesion, then build a spoken argument that flows from point to point.

cohesion (n)
the way the parts of a text connect into a whole (bağdaşıklık, tutunum)
Syn: connectedness · Ant: disjointedness
"Good cohesion lets a reader glide from sentence to sentence."
coherence (n)
the logical consistency of the ideas themselves (tutarlılık, bütünlük)
Syn: consistency · Ant: incoherence
"A text can be grammatical yet still lack coherence."
transition (n)
a word or phrase that links one idea to the next (geçiş ifadesi)
Syn: link · Ant: abrupt break
"A smooth transition tells the reader where the argument turns."
redundant (adj)
repeated or included unnecessarily (gereksiz, fazlalık)
Syn: superfluous · Ant: essential
"Reference removes redundant repetition of the same noun."
concise (adj)
giving much information in few, clear words (özlü, kısa ve öz)
Syn: succinct · Ant: verbose
"Ellipsis keeps a sentence concise without losing meaning."
verbose (adj)
using far more words than are needed (laf kalabalığı, gereğinden uzun)
Syn: long-winded · Ant: terse
"Stacking connectors makes the prose verbose and tiring."
explicit (adj)
stated clearly and fully, leaving no doubt (açık, net biçimde belirtilmiş)
Syn: clear-cut · Ant: implicit
"A marker makes the link between two ideas explicit."
implicit (adj)
implied rather than directly expressed (ima edilen, örtük)
Syn: implied · Ant: explicit
"The contrast was implicit, so a "however" would help."
ambiguous (adj)
open to more than one interpretation (belirsiz, çok anlamlı)
Syn: unclear · Ant: unambiguous
"A vague "this" leaves the reference ambiguous."
seamless (adj)
so smooth that no joins can be noticed (kusursuz, dikişsiz, akıcı)
Syn: smooth · Ant: disjointed
"The best cohesion is seamless: the reader never sees it."
signpost (v)
to guide the reader through the structure of a text (metinde yol göstermek)
Syn: guide · Ant: obscure
"Markers signpost where the argument adds, turns or concludes."
paraphrase (v)
to restate something in different words (başka sözcüklerle ifade etmek)
Syn: reword · Ant: quote verbatim
"Paraphrasing a term avoids repeating it word for word."
Pick the marker that matches the logical relationship ADD (same direction) moreover · furthermore in addition CONTRAST / CONCEDE however · by contrast nevertheless RESULT / CONCLUDE consequently therefore · thus Wrong family → the reader is misled. Right family → the logic is clear.
A marker is a signpost: it must point in the direction your argument actually goes.

Production Task (Üretim Görevi)

Argue a position on a debatable topic — for example, "Should cities ban private cars from their centres?" Write 8 sentences and use at least 8 of the words above. Make your discourse markers and reference do real work — do not just list claims.

Grammar requirement — apply this unit's topic
  • Use reference at least once so you don't repeat a noun (this, these, such, the former / the latter).
  • Use substitution or ellipsis once (one/ones, do so, so/not) to keep a sentence concise.
  • Add a point with an additive marker (moreover, furthermore, in addition) and turn the argument with a contrast/concession marker (however, by contrast, nevertheless).
  • Draw a conclusion with a result marker (consequently, therefore), and keep the register formal — no plus or on top of that.

Sentence starters (you can begin with these):

"There are two options here: ...; the former ..." "Moreover, this policy would ..." "However, such a measure may ..." "The data are limited; consequently, ..." "Nevertheless, the evidence signposts a clear ..."

Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will review your task.)

Ünite 16 · Cohesion & Discourse Markers · Bölüm 3/6

Reading: The Invisible Architecture of Prose

Read the feature, then work through the five tasks.

Before You Read (Okumadan Önce)

Skilled readers prepare before they start. Before you read, think about these three questions (you do not need to write the answers):

  • Have you ever read something grammatically correct that still felt disjointed and hard to follow? What was missing?
  • The text argues that cohesion is built from small, almost invisible devices rather than big ideas. What might those devices be?
  • Writers can use too many connectors as well as too few. Watch for the sentence that shows what overloading looks like.
How to read
  • First read: read quickly for the whole argument — what cohesion is, and why it matters. Don't stop for every word.
  • Second read: track the cohesive devices (this, such, one, consequently, however, nevertheless) and ask what each one does to link the sentences.

Words to spot (from the Speaking section): cohesion · coherence · transition · redundant · concise · ambiguous · seamless · signpost

Cohesion links separate sentences into one chain Sentence 1 Sentence 2 Sentence 3 this however reference · substitution · discourse markers Remove the threads and the ideas fall apart into a disjointed list.
The best cohesion is invisible: the reader feels the flow but never notices the joins.
The Invisible Architecture of Prose

Consider two texts that convey exactly the same information. The first proceeds as a series of short, self-contained statements, each one grammatically correct yet oddly stranded, so that the reader is left to supply the connections the writer has failed to make. The second moves; its ideas seem to reach forward and backward, anticipating a question and answering it before it is asked. The difference between the two has almost nothing to do with vocabulary or subject matter, and almost everything to do with the invisible machinery that binds isolated sentences into a single, purposeful line of thought.

It is worth distinguishing at the outset between two qualities that are easily confused. Coherence describes the underlying logic of a text — whether the ideas themselves hang together and lead somewhere worth going. Cohesion, by contrast, is the surface machinery that makes that logic visible: the pronouns, the substitutes and the connectors that stitch one sentence to the next. A text may be perfectly coherent in the writer's own mind and yet feel disjointed on the page, simply because the cohesive links have been left unstated; equally, a shower of connectors cannot rescue ideas that were never coherent to begin with. The two qualities work in tandem, and neither can do the other's job.

A well-written argument rarely feels like a heap of separate facts. Instead, its sentences seem to lean on one another, each picking up a thread from the last and passing it on. This quality is called cohesion, and it is achieved less by grand ideas than by a modest set of devices: pronouns that point back, words that stand in for a whole phrase, and the discourse markers — however, moreover, nevertheless — that signal how one thought relates to the next.

Reference is the quietest of these devices. A pronoun such as "it", or a demonstrative such as "this", lets a writer avoid clumsy repetition; consequently, the prose reads faster and feels more controlled. Substitution and ellipsis work in the same way: rather than repeat a noun, a careful writer will use "one", and rather than restate a verb, will simply leave it out. Such economy is not laziness; it is, by contrast, a mark of fluency, keeping the text concise without any loss of meaning.

Discourse markers are the most visible cohesive device, and therefore the most easily misused. Each one encodes a precise logical relationship: "moreover" adds, "however" contrasts, "consequently" draws a result. Choosing the wrong marker — signposting a contrast where the logic in fact continues — confuses the reader far more than using none at all. Register matters too: "furthermore" suits a formal essay, whereas "plus" belongs to conversation, and mixing the two makes the writing feel ambiguous and uneven.

Nevertheless, more is not better. A paragraph in which every sentence opens with a connector quickly becomes exhausting; the markers, instead of guiding, start to shout, and the prose turns verbose. Skilled writers therefore use them sparingly, trusting the reader to follow a clear line of thought. The best cohesion, arguably, is the kind that is never noticed at all: the reader simply glides from one idea to the next, unaware of the seamless architecture holding the whole together.

Understanding the principle, however, is far easier than applying it on the page. Take reference, the subtlest of these devices. Accomplished writers exploit not only "it" and "they" but a whole family of pointing words: "such" gestures back to the kind of thing just described, while "the former" and "the latter" allow two items to be picked up in order without either being named a second time. The danger, always, is ambiguity. A demonstrative left to stand alone — a bare "this" at the head of a sentence — can point back to any of several preceding ideas, and the reader stumbles while deciding which. Anchoring it to a noun, as in "this tendency" or "this distinction", restores the thread at once and makes the reference explicit rather than implicit.

Discourse markers, for their part, fall into a few broad families, and choosing well means first identifying the relationship one actually intends to signal. Some markers add a point in the same direction — "moreover", "furthermore", "in addition"; others concede or reverse it — "nevertheless", "by contrast", "on the other hand"; others again draw out a consequence — "therefore", "thus", "as a result". To reach for a contrast marker where the thought in fact continues, or an additive one where it plainly turns, is to make the link explicit and wrong at the very same moment, which unsettles a reader far more than a link left implicit. A marker must signpost the direction the argument genuinely takes, not the direction the writer half-remembers taking.

Cohesion also operates well above the level of the single sentence. Across a whole paragraph, careful writers sustain a thread by returning to a small set of key terms and their near-synonyms — a quiet chain of related words that keeps reminding the reader what the passage is really about. A further principle governs the order of information within each sentence: it tends to open with something already familiar and to close with something new, so that the fresh element of one sentence becomes the familiar starting point of the next. When this given-to-new rhythm is respected, a paragraph seems to draw the reader gently forward; when it is violated, even faultless sentences feel as though they are pulling against the current.

Because these devices are so effective, they are also easily overused, and the remedy lies in revision rather than in a longer list of connectors. A useful discipline is to reread a draft and strike out every marker that the surrounding sentences already imply; more often than not the logic survives the cut untouched, and the prose breathes more freely for it. What should remain is the handful of signposts that genuinely earn their place — a "however" exactly where the argument turns, a "consequently" precisely where a result would otherwise slip past unnoticed. Cohesion, understood in this way, is quite as much a matter of restraint as of technique, and the temptation to signpost everything is the surest sign of a writer who does not yet trust the reader.

Perhaps the surest way to develop this instinct is to read one's own work aloud. The ear catches what the eye forgives: the small jolt of a missing link, the tedium of the same connector repeated three times in a paragraph, the faint confusion of a pronoun with no clear owner. Over time, the choices that once demanded conscious thought become automatic, and the writer stops assembling sentences one by one and begins, instead, to compose whole passages. That, in the end, is what a mastery of cohesion offers — not a set of rules to be memorised, but the quiet confidence that a reader will arrive exactly where the writer intended, having noticed nothing whatever of the road that carried them there.

A · Multiple Choice

Choose the correct answer.

B · True / False (Doğru / Yanlış)

Are these sentences true or false, according to the text?

C · Gap Fill

Complete each sentence with ONE word from the text. Choose the exact cohesive word the writer uses.

1 quality — sentences leaning on one another — is what the writer calls cohesion. Doğru cevap: this
2A pronoun lets a writer avoid clumsy repetition; , the prose reads faster. Doğru cevap: consequently
3 economy — using "one" or leaving a verb out — is a mark of fluency, not laziness. Doğru cevap: such
4 , more is not better: too many markers exhaust the reader. Doğru cevap: nevertheless
5Skilled writers use discourse markers sparingly, trusting the reader. Doğru cevap: therefore

D · Open-Ended

Write your answer in your own words. These questions are not marked automatically.

1. Why does the writer argue that cohesion is built more from small devices than from grand ideas?

Sample Answer"The writer argues that what makes a text flow is not the originality of its ideas but a modest toolkit of devices: pronouns and demonstratives that point back, substitutes such as 'one', and discourse markers that signal how ideas relate. These devices let each sentence lean on the last, so the argument reads as a connected chain rather than a list of separate facts."

2. According to the text, what happens when a writer uses too many discourse markers? Do you agree that this is a real danger?

Sample Answer"The text says that when every sentence opens with a connector, the prose becomes exhausting and the markers, instead of guiding, start to shout. I agree: too many signposts distract the reader rather than help, and the writing turns verbose. A marker works best where the link would otherwise be unclear, not on every single sentence."

3. The text ends by calling the best cohesion "the kind that is never noticed at all." What do you think this means?

Sample Answer"I think it means that cohesion succeeds precisely when the reader is unaware of it. If the devices are chosen well, the reader simply glides from one idea to the next and feels the argument is easy to follow, without stopping to notice a single pronoun or connector. The 'architecture' is invisible because it is doing its job; only clumsy or missing links draw attention to themselves."

E · Connector Hunt (Bağlaç Avı)

Find these connectors in the text — each one appears at least once: instead, whereas, however, consequently, by contrast, therefore, moreover, nevertheless. (You will reuse these same C1 connectors in the Writing section.) Note them down, then check.

Answers instead: "Instead, its sentences seem to lean on one another..." (also "the markers, instead of guiding, start to shout")
however: "...the discourse markers — however, moreover, nevertheless..." (also "'however' contrasts")
moreover: "'moreover' adds, 'however' contrasts..."
consequently: "...avoid clumsy repetition; consequently, the prose reads faster."
by contrast: "it is, by contrast, a mark of fluency."
therefore: "...the most visible cohesive device, and therefore the most easily misused." (also "Skilled writers therefore use them sparingly")
whereas: "'furthermore' suits a formal essay, whereas 'plus' belongs to conversation."
nevertheless: "Nevertheless, more is not better."
Ünite 16 · Cohesion & Discourse Markers · Bölüm 4/6

Extra Speaking & Practice

Rewrite a disjointed, repetitive text into smooth, well-linked prose, then drill the cohesion choices with 10 quick questions.

Speaking Task 2 (Re-tell with Better Cohesion)

Below is a choppy, repetitive paragraph. Every sentence repeats a noun and the ideas sit side by side with no links, so the logic is left implicit. Your job is to re-tell it as smooth, cohesive prose — use reference, substitution and the right discourse markers to make the relationships explicit.

The city built a new tram line. The new tram line was expensive. The new tram line reduced traffic. Some drivers still use cars. The drivers who still use cars complain about the tram line. The council will extend the tram line. Extending the tram line will cost more money.
Grammar requirement — apply this unit's topic
  • Use reference to stop repeating "the tram line" (it, this line, such a project) and substitution where you can (one, do so).
  • Add a point with an additive marker (moreover, in addition) and turn the argument with a contrast/concession marker (however, nevertheless).
  • Make a result explicit with consequently or therefore, and keep the register formal (no plus).
  • Write 6–8 sentences. Keep the facts; change only how they are connected.

Sentence starters (you can begin with these):

"The city built a new tram line, which, though expensive, ..." "It has reduced traffic; however, some drivers ..." "Such complaints are common; nevertheless, ..." "Moreover, the council plans to extend it, ..." "Consequently, the project will cost even more."

Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will review your task.)

Practice Lab (Alıştırma Turu)

10 quick questions on cohesion and discourse markers. Each one is marked instantly. Questions get harder as you go.

Ünite 16 · Cohesion & Discourse Markers · Bölüm 5/6

Writing: A Well-Connected Argument

Write and submit a discursive paragraph that flows through reference, substitution and discourse markers; your teacher will review it.

Connectors that sound C1 (Linking Words)

A good argument needs to flow, and discourse markers are what carry the reader from one idea to the next. At C1 you command a sharper, more formal set — whereas, however, consequently, by contrast, nonetheless and therefore — which let you add, concede, contrast and conclude. Choose the one whose meaning matches your logic, and the whole argument holds together.

ConnectorUse it to...Example
howeverqualify or contrast the previous sentenceThe trend is clear. However, the sample was small.
by contrastset one case sharply against anotherOlder users are cautious; younger ones, by contrast, are not.
consequentlystate a measured result or effectData were limited; consequently, the claim is tentative.
whereasdraw a direct, balanced contrastThe theory is elegant, whereas the evidence is thin.
nonethelessconcede a point, then hold your positionThe effect is small; nonetheless, it appears real.
thereforedraw a cautious conclusionThe data are mixed; therefore, caution is advisable.

See the difference — the same facts, written two ways:

Disjointed & repetitive ✗Cohesive C1 prose ✓
Remote work saves commuting time. Remote work can weaken teamwork. Some staff feel isolated. Some staff work better at home. Offices are still useful. Remote work saves commuting time; however, it can weaken teamwork. Some staff feel isolated, whereas others work better at home. Consequently, its effects vary widely, and such variation matters. Nevertheless, offices remain useful for the former group.
Rule
  • Use at least 3 different C1 connectors from the table, and match each to the real logical relationship. Weave your argument; don't list claims.
  • However, Consequently, Nonetheless, Therefore usually open a sentence and take a comma: "Consequently, the two ideas are linked."

How to structure a well-connected argument (Argument Structure)

A strong C1 argument is not a run of unlinked sentences. It states a position, builds on it, turns to weigh the counter-case, and lands a conclusion — and at every join a cohesive device carries the reader across. The skeleton stays the same — you change the content, not the shape:

PartWhat to writeCohesion to reach for
1. Positionstate your claim clearlyIt could be argued that... / reference back with this / such
2. Supportadd a reason in the same directionmoreover / furthermore / in addition
3. Concessionturn to a counterpoint or limitationhowever / whereas / nevertheless / by contrast
4. Conclusiondraw the result the argument points toconsequently / therefore / thus

Task (Görev)

Write a discursive paragraph on a debatable question — for example, "Does artificial intelligence threaten more jobs than it creates?" or a topic of your choice. Write like a careful academic: build one connected chain of ideas, and make every link between sentences clear.

WHAT TO INCLUDE

  • reference at least twice to avoid repeating a noun (it, this, these, such, the former / the latter)
  • at least one use of substitution or ellipsis (one/ones, do so, so/not)
  • at least one additive marker (moreover, furthermore, in addition) building your case
  • at least one contrast or concession marker (however, whereas, nevertheless, by contrast)
  • at least 3 different C1 connectors in total, each matching its logical relationship
  • at least 4 words from the Speaking section (cohesion, coherence, transition, concise, explicit, implicit, ambiguous, seamless, signpost, paraphrase)
  • correct register (no plus, so, on top of that) and no overloading — don't put a marker on every sentence

EXAMPLE OPENERS

"It could be argued that automation ...; moreover, ..." "Such fears are common; however, ..." "The former group benefits, whereas the latter ..."

Your Argument (180-220 words / kelime)

0 kelime

Değerlendirme öğretmenin tarafından yapılacak. (Your teacher will evaluate your writing.)

Sample Answer (~205 words) It could be argued that artificial intelligence threatens more jobs than it creates. This claim rests on a real trend: automation is already displacing routine tasks, and such roles are the most exposed. Moreover, the same technologies are advancing faster than most workers can retrain, which sharpens the concern.

However, the picture is not so one-sided. New tools also generate demand for skills that did not exist before, whereas earlier machines only replaced manual labour. In other words, AI both destroys and creates work; the two effects run side by side. Making this relationship explicit matters, because a coherent argument must weigh one against the other rather than list them.

The outcome, therefore, depends largely on policy. If governments invest in retraining, displaced workers can move into the new roles; if they do not, they cannot, and whole communities may be left behind. Such a transition is rarely seamless.

Consequently, rather than predicting mass unemployment, it seems wiser to say that AI will reshape employment more than it eliminates it. Nevertheless, this reassurance holds only where retraining is taken seriously. To be concise: the technology is not the danger; a disjointed, unprepared response to it is.
Ünite 16 · Cohesion & Discourse Markers · Bölüm 6/6

Unit Check (Ünite Kontrolü)

Mixed questions from the whole unit, then check what you can do.

Mixed Quiz (Karışık Test)

14 questions: grammar + vocabulary + reading + practice. Each question is marked instantly.

Can-Do Check (Yapabiliyorum Listesi)

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.

Gri English

Bu ünite için giriş gerekli

Oturum kontrol ediliyor...