C. Because they don’t care about people’s health and just want to make money
I would say yes, you’re technically not considered “grown” at that age, and you’re still at the point where you wanna hang out with your friends and be children, even at that you could just call it free time if the kids think they’re too old for recess.
If you are trying to correct it, the answer would be...
While visiting Washington, D.C., we went to the Lincoln Memorial and the Vietnam Memorial.
Answer:
- Complete your homework before playing your game.
- Bring me your chromebook.
Explanation:
Imperative mood is of three verb moods in English. It is used to express an order, demand or a command.
It comprises of bare infinitive of the verb and is most often used in second person singuar or plural.
Obviously, first and last option here use imperative mood; they express a demand, something that needs to be done (Complete your homework! Bring me that!).
Option 2) is a question, and in English, for posing questions, we use indicative mood.
Option 3) is an expression of a wish, and for that, we use subjunctive mood.
Answer:
It fails to support its claim with specific, credible evidence and uses a disrespectful tone.
Explanation:
When giving arguments in favor or against a specific subject, they must be supported by reason and logic as well as credible evidence that can be compared with reality. They also need to be coherent with the things you are stating, this has to be done in a respectful tone as you are open to the idea of others comments and counterarguments. You are supposed to show you are right with these arguments, not by insulting or despising others.
In my opinion, this excerpt fails in both. It is not respectful and it's arguments are not strong enough.
He states that there is not proof of who is right or wrong on the debate adressed, he needs to support this with evidence. Who states that?
He the concludes that "no valid judgment can be made for everyone on whether smartphones should be banned from teens." This seems as an opinion based on his own reasoning.
After this, he starts making judgments about the people supporting the restriction, calling them naïve. This is not polite or useful. As I said, this is not based on evidence, he is contradicting himself as he stated in the first lines that there was no evidence of who was rigth or wrong.
The next lines express just his opinions based on his values and thoughts, evidence to support them is never presented.
