The first claim establishes a formal style compared to the second claim primarily by including complex syntax. The language in the first claim is more technical and discusses the potential risks associated with genetic engineering in a detailed manner, such as "disturbing genetic integrity" and the "activation of dormant toxin levels." In contrast, the second claim uses simpler, more direct language to discuss the issue of childhood blindness and the solution of Golden Rice without as much complexity in sentence structure.
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.
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)
by using complex vocabulary
by including complex syntax
by using a third-person perspective
by including real-world examples
1 answer