MyDiscussion text

There are many reasons for both sides of the question, "Should we have printed advertisement'?" Many people have strong views and feel that ads are nothing more than useless junk mail, while other people feel it is important source information.

There are some reasons why we should have advertisement in newspaper and magazines. One reason is ads give us information about what is available. Looking at ads we can find out what is on sale and what is new in the market. This is an easy way of shopping. Another reason is that advertisement promotes business. When shop owners compete against each other the buyer saves money, more people come to their shops and they sell more goods.

On the other hand, some people argue that ads should not be put in newspapers and magazines for these various reasons. Firstly, ads cost the shopkeepers a lot of money to print onto paper. Also some people don't like finding junk mail in their letter boxes. Ads also influence people to buy items they don't need and can't really afford. Ads use up a lot of space and a lot of effort has to be made the ads eye-catching.

After looking at both sides of issue, I think we should not have advertisements because they cost a lot of money and take up a lot of room in the papers. I don't think I find some of them interesting. I mainly disagree because it's junk mail.

Why does the writer present two sides of opinions of advertisements?

• She/he wants to take side

• She/he wants to be in the affirmative side

• She/he uses the opinions to emphasize her own stance

• She/he wants the readers know the opinion about the issue

• She/he wants the readers to understand her stance

There are many reasons for both sides of the question, "Should we have printed advertisement'?" Many people have strong views and feel that ads are nothing more than useless junk mail, while other people feel it is important source information.

There are some reasons why we should have advertisement in newspaper and magazines. One reason is ads give us information about what is available. Looking at ads we can find out what is on sale and what is new in the market. This is an easy way of shopping. Another reason is that advertisement promotes business. When shop owners compete against each other the buyer saves money, more people come to their shops and they sell more goods.

On the other hand, some people argue that ads should not be put in newspapers and magazines for these various reasons. Firstly, ads cost the shopkeepers a lot of money to print onto paper. Also some people don't like finding junk mail in their letter boxes. Ads also influence people to buy items they don't need and can't really afford. Ads use up a lot of space and a lot of effort has to be made the ads eye-catching.

After looking at both sides of issue, I think we should not have advertisements because they cost a lot of money and take up a lot of room in the papers. I don't think I find some of them interesting. I mainly disagree because it's junk mail.

The writer influences the readers by repeatedly saying that ....

• The ads are only garbage

• The ads contain unimportant business information

• The ads promote unnecessary service products

• The ads inform us tips of easy shopping

• The ads become the source of information

There are many reasons for both sides of the question, "Should we have printed advertisement'?" Many people have strong views and feel that ads are nothing more than useless junk mail, while other people feel it is important source information.There are some reasons why we should have advertisement in newspaper and magazines. One reason is ads give us information about what is available. Looking at ads we can find out what is on sale and what is new in the market. This is an easy way of shopping. Another reason is that advertisement promotes business. When shop owners compete against each other the buyer saves money, more people come to their shops and they sell more goods.

On the other hand, some people argue that ads should not be put in newspapers and magazines for these various reasons. Firstly, ads cost the shopkeepers a lot of money to print onto paper. Also some people don't like finding junk mail in their letter boxes. Ads also influence people to buy items they don't need and can't really afford. Ads use up a lot of space and a lot of effort has to be made the ads eye-catching.

After looking at both sides of issue, I think we should not have advertisements because they cost a lot of money and take up a lot of room in the papers. I don't think I find some of them interesting. I mainly disagree because it's junk mail.

"Ads use up a lot of space and a lot of effort has to be made the ads eye-catching. The underlined word is closest in meaning to ....

• Newsworthy

• Subtle

• Plain

• .Impressive

• Delicate

There are many reasons for both sides of the question, "Should we have printed advertisement'?" Many people have strong views and feel that ads are nothing more than useless junk mail, while other people feel it is important source information.There are some reasons why we should have advertisement in newspaper and magazines. One reason is ads give us information about what is available. Looking at ads we can find out what is on sale and what is new in the market. This is an easy way of shopping. Another reason is that advertisement promotes business. When shop owners compete against each other the buyer saves money, more people come to their shops and they sell more goods.

On the other hand, some people argue that ads should not be put in newspapers and magazines for these various reasons. Firstly, ads cost the shopkeepers a lot of money to print onto paper. Also some people don't like finding junk mail in their letter boxes. Ads also influence people to buy items they don't need and can't really afford. Ads use up a lot of space and a lot of effort has to be made the ads eye-catching.

After looking at both sides of issue, I think we should not have advertisements because they cost a lot of money and take up a lot of room in the papers. I don't think I find some of them interesting. I mainly disagree because it's junk mail.

What is the generic structure of the text?

• Arguments-Recommendation-Thesis

• Recommendation-Issue-Arguments-Thesis

• Issue-Supporting Points-Contrasting Points-Conclusion

• Thesis-Supporting Points-Contrasting Points-Reiteration

• Reiteration-Arguments-Thesis

There are many reasons for both sides of the question, "Should we have printed advertisement'?" Many people have strong views and feel that ads are nothing more than useless junk mail, while other people feel it is important source information.

There are some reasons why we should have advertisement in newspaper and magazines. One reason is ads give us information about what is available. Looking at ads we can find out what is on sale and what is new in the market. This is an easy way of shopping. Another reason is that advertisement promotes business. When shop owners compete against each other the buyer saves money, more people come to their shops and they sell more goods.

On the other hand, some people argue that ads should not be put in newspapers and magazines for these various reasons. Firstly, ads cost the shopkeepers a lot of money to print onto paper. Also some people don't like finding junk mail in their letter boxes. Ads also influence people to buy items they don't need and can't really afford. Ads use up a lot of space and a lot of effort has to be made the ads eye-catching.

After looking at both sides of issue, I think we should not have advertisements because they cost a lot of money and take up a lot of room in the papers. I don't think I find some of them interesting. I mainly disagree because it's junk mail.

. "... their shops and they sell more goods." (paragraph 2) The underlined word refers to ....

• . Buyer

• Shop owners

• Readers

• Writer

• Advertiser

Muslim’s Headscarf

The right to freedom of religion is enshrined in the UN charter and considered by many to be a basic human right. Some religions require special diet, others prayer at specific times. Why should a religious mode of dress receive as much protection as these other aspects of religious freedom?

Many Muslim women view the veil as a means to protect their modesty and privacy. Just as we would not force any women to be seen in public in her underwear if she did not feel comfortable doing so, why should a woman be forced to show her hair if she does not want to? Modesty is a personal judgement, some are comfortable in the smallest bikini while others prefer a lot more clothing. No one but the woman herself should make that decision.

Muslim women are not the only ones to feel coerced over their mode of dress. Most people are affected by the societal norms surrounding them. Fashion trends could be seen in exactly the same light as religious traditions.

Banning head coverings is only likely to provoke a more extreme reaction among highly religious communities. Framing laws to ban only Islamic forms of dress could be considered an attack on one religion. Feeling under attack could cause the Islamic community to close off into itself. They could set up religious schools where their children can dress as they want them to and not mix with children from other faiths. These effects could never be good for the integration of society and would further the influence of extremists. Internationally, the perceived attack on Islamic values would inflame wider Muslim opinion, feed conspiracy theories and add to the dangerous feeling that there is a clash of civilizations.

Intolerant schools make up problems as an excuse for not allowing Muslims freedom of religious expression. In a multicultural society, students should be aware of the different religious practice and cultural traditions of their classmates, and be taught to understand and respect these.

Based on the above discussion, the government should not banned Muslim’s headscarf as a part of school or office uniforms.

What is the first paragraph called?

• Issue

• Conclusion

• Preview

• Argument

• Orientation

Muslim’s Headscarf

The right to freedom of religion is enshrined in the UN charter and considered by many to be a basic human right. Some religions require special diet, others prayer at specific times. Why should a religious mode of dress receive as much protection as these other aspects of religious freedom?

Many Muslim women view the veil as a means to protect their modesty and privacy. Just as we would not force any women to be seen in public in her underwear if she did not feel comfortable doing so, why should a woman be forced to show her hair if she does not want to? Modesty is a personal judgement, some are comfortable in the smallest bikini while others prefer a lot more clothing. No one but the woman herself should make that decision.

Muslim women are not the only ones to feel coerced over their mode of dress. Most people are affected by the societal norms surrounding them. Fashion trends could be seen in exactly the same light as religious traditions.

Banning head coverings is only likely to provoke a more extreme reaction among highly religious communities. Framing laws to ban only Islamic forms of dress could be considered an attack on one religion. Feeling under attack could cause the Islamic community to close off into itself. They could set up religious schools where their children can dress as they want them to and not mix with children from other faiths. These effects could never be good for the integration of society and would further the influence of extremists. Internationally, the perceived attack on Islamic values would inflame wider Muslim opinion, feed conspiracy theories and add to the dangerous feeling that there is a clash of civilizations.

Intolerant schools make up problems as an excuse for not allowing Muslims freedom of religious expression. In a multicultural society, students should be aware of the different religious practice and cultural traditions of their classmates, and be taught to understand and respect these.

Based on the above discussion, the government should not banned Muslim’s headscarf as a part of school or office uniforms.

What is Muslim women’s view on the veil?

• . It is an obstacle of their freedom

• it is to protect their modesty and privacy

• It is a fashion trend among them

• They feel being forced to wear it

• It is what their parents told them to wear

Muslim’s Headscarf

The right to freedom of religion is enshrined in the UN charter and considered by many to be a basic human right. Some religions require special diet, others prayer at specific times. Why should a religious mode of dress receive as much protection as these other aspects of religious freedom?

Many Muslim women view the veil as a means to protect their modesty and privacy. Just as we would not force any women to be seen in public in her underwear if she did not feel comfortable doing so, why should a woman be forced to show her hair if she does not want to? Modesty is a personal judgement, some are comfortable in the smallest bikini while others prefer a lot more clothing. No one but the woman herself should make that decision.

Muslim women are not the only ones to feel coerced over their mode of dress. Most people are affected by the societal norms surrounding them. Fashion trends could be seen in exactly the same light as religious traditions.

Banning head coverings is only likely to provoke a more extreme reaction among highly religious communities. Framing laws to ban only Islamic forms of dress could be considered an attack on one religion. Feeling under attack could cause the Islamic community to close off into itself. They could set up religious schools where their children can dress as they want them to and not mix with children from other faiths. These effects could never be good for the integration of society and would further the influence of extremists. Internationally, the perceived attack on Islamic values would inflame wider Muslim opinion, feed conspiracy theories and add to the dangerous feeling that there is a clash of civilizations.

Intolerant schools make up problems as an excuse for not allowing Muslims freedom of religious expression. In a multicultural society, students should be aware of the different religious practice and cultural traditions of their classmates, and be taught to understand and respect these.

Based on the above discussion, the government should not banned Muslim’s headscarf as a part of school or office uniforms.

Paragraph 4 tells us that banning on Muslim headscarf could ….

• Arouse social conflict among social communities

• Maintain solidarity among social communities

• Provoke a more extreme reaction among highly religious communities

• Teach students social awareness

• Make Muslim women loose their identity

Muslim’s Headscarf

The right to freedom of religion is enshrined in the UN charter and considered by many to be a basic human right. Some religions require special diet, others prayer at specific times. Why should a religious mode of dress receive as much protection as these other aspects of religious freedom?

Many Muslim women view the veil as a means to protect their modesty and privacy. Just as we would not force any women to be seen in public in her underwear if she did not feel comfortable doing so, why should a woman be forced to show her hair if she does not want to? Modesty is a personal judgement, some are comfortable in the smallest bikini while others prefer a lot more clothing. No one but the woman herself should make that decision.

Muslim women are not the only ones to feel coerced over their mode of dress. Most people are affected by the societal norms surrounding them. Fashion trends could be seen in exactly the same light as religious traditions.

Banning head coverings is only likely to provoke a more extreme reaction among highly religious communities. Framing laws to ban only Islamic forms of dress could be considered an attack on one religion. Feeling under attack could cause the Islamic community to close off into itself. They could set up religious schools where their children can dress as they want them to and not mix with children from other faiths. These effects could never be good for the integration of society and would further the influence of extremists. Internationally, the perceived attack on Islamic values would inflame wider Muslim opinion, feed conspiracy theories and add to the dangerous feeling that there is a clash of civilizations.

Intolerant schools make up problems as an excuse for not allowing Muslims freedom of religious expression. In a multicultural society, students should be aware of the different religious practice and cultural traditions of their classmates, and be taught to understand and respect these.

Based on the above discussion, the government should not banned Muslim’s headscarf as a part of school or office uniforms.

What does the writer suggest?

• Schools should not be tolerant to any freedom of religious expression

• Students should know various social groups among the society

• The government should ban Muslims headscarf because it may arouse conflicts

• Muslim’s headscarf as a part of school or office uniforms should not be banned

• Schools are allowed to ban Muslim headscarf because it may arouse many problems

Muslim’s Headscarf

The right to freedom of religion is enshrined in the UN charter and considered by many to be a basic human right. Some religions require special diet, others prayer at specific times. Why should a religious mode of dress receive as much protection as these other aspects of religious freedom?

Many Muslim women view the veil as a means to protect their modesty and privacy. Just as we would not force any women to be seen in public in her underwear if she did not feel comfortable doing so, why should a woman be forced to show her hair if she does not want to? Modesty is a personal judgement, some are comfortable in the smallest bikini while others prefer a lot more clothing. No one but the woman herself should make that decision.

Muslim women are not the only ones to feel coerced over their mode of dress. Most people are affected by the societal norms surrounding them. Fashion trends could be seen in exactly the same light as religious traditions.

Banning head coverings is only likely to provoke a more extreme reaction among highly religious communities. Framing laws to ban only Islamic forms of dress could be considered an attack on one religion. Feeling under attack could cause the Islamic community to close off into itself. They could set up religious schools where their children can dress as they want them to and not mix with children from other faiths. These effects could never be good for the integration of society and would further the influence of extremists. Internationally, the perceived attack on Islamic values would inflame wider Muslim opinion, feed conspiracy theories and add to the dangerous feeling that there is a clash of civilizations.

Intolerant schools make up problems as an excuse for not allowing Muslims freedom of religious expression. In a multicultural society, students should be aware of the different religious practice and cultural traditions of their classmates, and be taught to understand and respect these.

Based on the above discussion, the government should not banned Muslim’s headscarf as a part of school or office uniforms.

“Intolerant schools make up problems as an excuse for not allowing…..” (paragraph 5) The underlined word is synonymous with ……

• Reason

• Custom

• Expectation

• Evidence

• Requirement