Claim 1: Genetic engineering results in farms that are less environmentally friendly. A large number of genetically modified crops are engineered to be resistant to to chemical herbicides. The idea is that chemicals most of which are high dangerous, are sprayed with abandon on fields but only killed weeds and undesirable plants, not the GMO crops themselves. It doesn’t take a lot of thought to realize why this is a bad idea. If farmers don’t have to worry about killing their crops, they aren’t going to give a lot of thought to how many chemicals they’re using.

Question

Claim 2: Genetic Engineering results in farms that are more environmentally friendly. In 2019, about 80 percent of the corn grown in the United States was Bt corn, a genetically modified variety. The chief difference between Bt and standard corn is that this modified crop produces bacillus thruingiensis, a bacterial insecticide that had reduced the need for chemical pesticides. The use of crops such as these have red used the amount of chemicals used in fields by over one third, which in turn boosts the health of soil, air, and local water supplies;

Compare the two claims above. How does the first claim establish informal style when compared to the second one?

A. By avoiding complex syntax

B. By including anecdotal evidence

C. By using conversational language

D. By using third person perspective

Answer 1

The correct answer is C. By using conversational language.

The first claim uses a more conversational style, bringing in elements that suggest a direct engagement with the reader, making it feel informal. This is contrasted with the second claim, which is more formal and presents data and statistics in a more structured manner. The use of conversational language in the first claim helps convey concerns in a relatable way.