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 entered the contest. |
| 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 friends debate whether to join the school drama club. 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
This term, our geography class had to prepare a project on sustainable travel, and almost every group chose the same popular topic: ecotourism. At first, most of us assumed the answer was obvious, because surely a holiday that claims to help the planet must be a good thing. Yet the more articles we read, the more we argued about them, until our teacher decided to turn the whole discussion into a proper class debate with two teams and a long list of evidence.
Before the debate, we had to agree on what ecotourism actually is. We decided that it means travelling to wild or natural places in a way that is supposed to respect the environment and support the people who live there. For teenagers like us, it usually appears as a school trip to a nature reserve, a family holiday built around hiking or snorkelling, or the endless stream of wildlife videos we scroll through every evening. Because it touches our own lives so directly, nobody in the room found it hard to have an opinion.
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.
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.
The strongest argument in favour came from a classmate whose cousins live beside a national park. A few years ago, their village earned almost nothing from the forest unless somebody cut it down; today, the same families guide birdwatchers, rent out spare rooms and sell home-cooked meals to visitors. Because the forest is now worth more standing than felled, the whole community has a real reason to defend it. Social media plays a surprising part as well. When people our age post photos of sea turtles or misty mountains, thousands of followers suddenly want to see those places for themselves and, ideally, to keep them beautiful. A single short video can teach more teenagers about an endangered animal than a whole shelf of textbooks ever could.
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.
Our opponents, however, had no trouble finding the other side of the story. One boy described a school trip to a ‘protected’ beach that had been so crowded with visitors that the nesting birds had simply disappeared. Another pointed out that companies love to print the word ‘eco’ on their brochures without changing anything real, a trick our teacher called greenwashing. Even the photos we had praised carry a hidden cost: when a secret waterfall suddenly goes viral, enormous crowds arrive within weeks and trample the very paths they came to admire. Worst of all, every one of those journeys, and especially the long flights, adds to exactly the carbon problem we claimed to be solving.
There was also a lively side-argument about numbers. Someone had read that a famous island only lets a fixed number of visitors in each day, and half the class thought that was unfair, while the other half thought it was the only sensible option. In the end, even the doubters admitted that a place loved by millions cannot survive if all of them show up at once. Limits, ticket systems and quiet seasons are not there to spoil the fun; they exist so that the reef, the trail or the cave is still worth visiting when we are old enough to take our own friends and family there.
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.
By the second week, the question in our classroom was no longer simply ‘good or bad’ but ‘how’. We began collecting practical rules that young travellers could genuinely follow. Take the train instead of the plane whenever the distance allows. Travel in small groups rather than in enormous coach parties. Choose local guides who know the area instead of distant companies that fly staff in and out. If you love adventure sports such as kayaking, climbing or diving, stick to the marked routes and never chase a rare animal just to capture a better shot. None of these ideas is complicated, yet together they often decide whether a trip protects a place or slowly wears it away.
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.
When we finally presented the project, nobody demanded that ecotourism be banned, and nobody pretended it was flawless either. Instead, both teams agreed that the label on the brochure matters far less than the choices each traveller makes after arriving. If our generation is going to keep exploring the planet, and it clearly is, then learning to travel gently may turn out to be one of the most useful lessons school can give us. That, in the end, was the real conclusion of our debate.
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. | Wearing a school uniform has clear advantages, although it is not popular with everyone. |
| 2. Body | Give the advantages, then concede the drawbacks with concession links (despite, even though, whereas, however). | It saves time every morning; however, it can feel dull. Whereas a uniform hides differences, everyday clothes let students express themselves. |
| 3. Closing | Weigh both sides and give your view with On balance, ... | On balance, the sense of equality outweighs the drawbacks for me. |
Write a balanced paragraph that argues for and against a topic you know well — for example: wearing a school uniform, 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...