The first claim establishes a formal style when compared to the second claim by using a third-person perspective. The language in the first claim tends to be more scientific and objective, focusing on the risks and consequences of genetic engineering without personal or emotional language. In contrast, the second claim, while informative, uses a more subjective tone and appeals to the reader's emotions by describing childhood blindness as "horrible" and referring to beta carotene as a "godsend."
Claim 1: Scientific studies have shown that genetic engineering poses a grave risk to a plant’s genetic integrity. When this integrity is disturbed, the outcome is unpredictable. Dormant toxin levels can be activated in the plant, resulting in permanent damage to entire crops. This phenomenon occurred in StarLink corn, a product engineered to resist pests and that triggered life-threatening reactions in humans who consumed it.
Claim 2: Childhood blindness is a huge problem in developing countries. Nutritional deficiencies are usually to blame. That’s bad—horrible, in fact—but it can be avoided. Researchers have developed a variety of rice known as Golden Rice, which produces high levels of beta carotene. Beta carotene’s a godsend when it comes to this terrible problem, a thing of the past.
Question
Use the passage to answer the question.
Compare the two claims above. How does the first claim establish a formal style when compared to the second claim?
(1 point)
Responses
by using complex vocabulary
by using complex vocabulary
by including complex syntax
by including complex syntax
by using a third-person perspective
by using a third-person perspective
by including real-world examples
1 answer
1 answer