« IELTS Listening: multiple choice practice | Main | IELTS Writing Task 1: timing and introduction »

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

1. If there was a ban on cigarette, less people would smoke cigarette.
2. If the Government had charged less tax on income, I would have more money on my account.
3. If there were no teacher at schools, perhaps computer would doing the teaching.

1. If advertising were banned, the revenue would decline drastically.
2. If the government imposed a tax on unhealthy junk food, more people would care about their health.
3. If there were schools without any teachers, computers would play an important role in teaching students.

if advertising, i would have a devastating impact ob the growth of businessess.

if advertisment banned in today' world, people would might have a lesser choice when it comes to making purchases.

if advertismend had banned completely, materialistic culture, which can be seen as a norm nowadays among people, could have been removed from our society.

if the tax rate on junk food had increased, people would likely to prefer making food on their own at home, instead of paying higher prizes to buy from market


if government charge more tax from people on buying junk food, people would encourage to buy more green products such as vegetables etc.


If school were operated entirely by technology such as computers, students would have been less competitive, as only teacher can understands better the need of his or her pupil.

1. If advertising was banned, people would pay less for products.
2. If a tax was introduced on junk food, children would consume less such food.
3. If computer did all teaching, students would not be able to interact with the computer which teaches them.

if advertising, i would have a devastating impact ob the growth of businesses.


if advertisement banned in today' world, people would might have a lesser choice when it comes to making purchases.


if advertisement had banned completely, materialistic culture, which can be seen as a norm among people, could have removed from our society.


if the tax rate on junk food had increased, people would likely to prefer making food on their own at home, instead of paying higher prizes to buy from market

if government charge more tax from people on buying junk food, people would encourage to buy more green products such as vegetables etc.

If schools were operated entirely by technology such as computers, students would have been less competitive, as only teacher can better understand the need of his or her pupil.


.

wanted to know, whether the approach to write for advantages and dis-advantages question should be similar to discussion question

1. If advertising were banned completely, it would be difficult to have enough information about various products.

2. If a special tax were introduced on unhealthy junk food, general health status of society would be improved.

3. If there were no teachers in schools and computers did the teaching, learning would be more ineffective.

1. If commercial advertisement was prohibited, many small-scale companies would suffer from a significant of sales.

2. If governments imposed heavy tax on burgeoning fast food industry, perhaps the obesity rates in many nations would be lower.

3. If there were no teachers, computers would take the replacement in teachers´ role as instructors.

1. If advertisement were forbidden, i would have a dilemma of whether or not to buy products.
2. if the tax were placed on unhealthy junk food, the number of people who are suffering with obesity would be declined.
3. if there were the substituting of teachers for computers, lessons would be boring and misunderstandable.

Simom, check my sentences too and leave a feedback, please.

1. If advertising were band, competition would deplete dramatically.
2. If government applied tax on unhealthy junk food, people would suffer from less diseases.
3. If schools administered with any teachers, disorder and lawlessness would arise.

1, If there were a ban on advertising, consumers would pay less money on several goods.
2, If authorities set a tax on unhealthy junk food, this type of food would not be well consumed .
3, If no teachers appeared in schools, computers would do the teaching role

1.If uncensored commercials had been banned,
the crime rate would be seized from rising.
2. If governments had imposed tax on unhealthy food, city dwellers would not suffer detrimental effect brought by.
3. If there were no teachers in the schools,
the regulation of students would become a chaos.

Please correct me. Thanks Simon!

1. If advertising was banned, companies would find other solutions to tell the public about their products.

2. If the state put more tax on unhealthy junk food, it would be less people buy it and therefore the number of healthy people are likely to increase.

3. If schools had no teachers in the future and computers do the teaching tasks, it would probably no students like to go to school, instead they could study at home.


1.Imagine a ban on advertising.
If advertisement were banned, companies and enterprises would tend to pump their investment into other means to introduce their products.
2.Imagine a tax on unhealthy junk food.
If a tax were imposed on unhealthy junk food, the growing number of people would less likely to involve health problems.
3.Imagine schools with no teachers (computers doing the teaching).
If the role of teachers in school were replaced completely by computers, the process of learning would be less motivating since no one would encourage students to make progress with love and care.

1.Imagine a ban on advertising.
IF advertisement was banned, there would be more placement marketing in movies and TV shower.

2.Imagine a tax on unhealthy junk food.
If government did a tax on junk food, the amount of junk food would decrease.

3.Imagine schools with no teachers (computers doing the teaching).
If computers was replaced of teachers, students wouldn't concentrate on the whole class without interaction.

If the government made a ban on advertising, the price of goods would be lower

If manufacturers were taxed by product unhealthy junk food, our society would have fewer over-weight children

If there were no teachers at school, we would not let our children go to school any more

if excessive advertisement was banned,commercialization would definitely be decreased

if some tax was levied on junk food,we would not eat more unhealthy burgers
if teachers were replaced with computers,there would be no standard of education in schools

1.If advertisement were not allowed, how would we know what was on there and what was good for us.

2.People, especially junk food lovers, would sure get mad with the government, if the tax rose the price of the favorite food.

3.If computer did do the teaching stuffs, students would learn with excitement at first, but then soon realize the human connection, thing that build a their personality, had lost.

FROM SIMON:

Here are my suggestions. Remember: If + past + would

1. If advertising were banned, we wouldn't find out about new products.

2. If the government introduced a tax on junk food, people would be forced to eat more healthily.

3. If computers replaced teachers in schools, children would have a lot of information, but they would miss the human interaction and feedback that teachers provide.

...

I'll highlight some of the mistakes that people made (above) in a lesson this weekend.

if the ban was placed at a right position, we would see it and stop smoking.
if the goverment rises tax on junk food, people would eat more healthier food.
if there were no teachers at school, children would be taught by computers.

1- If the government had forbidden those advertisements aiming at people's mind, we would expect to perceive our existing circumstances much more better.

2- Parents would prevent their children from eating less nutritious food if they had to pay heavy taxes on purchasing junk food.

3- Instead of teaching students with well-trained teachers, If they were educated at a specific school in which computers were their tutors, they would find themselves in a very odd situation.

Hi Simon, just one question about your first sentence, I dont understand why you used "were" there, it doesnt have a single/ plural subject, was it because it's just a imagine condition, like it's not likely to happen?
like, if I were I bird, I would fly away to my dream land.?

your sentence "If advertising were banned, we wouldn't find out about new products."


and here are my sentences :)

1. If advertising were banned, people would not buy things they don't really need.

2. If there was a tax on junk food, parents would buy less unhealthy food for thier children. [children might protest about it though.]

3. If there were no teachers teaching in school but computers teaching only, students would not have the opportunities to interact with other students personally.

People can't purchase things what they really need due to ban on advertising.
Tax on junk food can make people more healthy because cooking at home in sensible.
Without teacher in class there would not discipline among the students.

1. Seriously I can't imagine a total ban on advertising. However, if that were the case, no double impulsive and unnecessary purchase would be cut down considerably, but at the same time a great deal of companies would close down, and a huge amount of people would be out of job.

2. If all the junk food were taxed heavily, people would be forced to consume healthier food, which would lead to the containment of global obesity epidemic.

3. If all the school teachers were replaced by computers or other artificial intelligence, students would undoubtedly have a blast surfing, learning, and sharing on-line, but at the cost of human touch, tailor and feedback, moral and ethic guidance.

It may be that computers doing teaching in the field of drawing or playing instruments on practical or technical skills. If this were the case, perhaps we wouldn't need more teacher of art and music foresee

1. If there were a ban on advertising, the consumers wouldn't be led by misinformation.

2. If government put tax on junk food, people would consider on choosing healthy food.

1. if the fast food ads were baned, children would eat less fast food.
2. If coke was charged high tax, the price would be increase.
3. If computers replaced teachers in schools, children would feel free.

krystal,

It's strange, but in the second conditional we use "were" instead of "was" e.g. "If I were" instead of "If I was".

My first sentence is a normal second conditional - I'm imagining a situation which isn't real, just like the sentence "If I were rich..."

Thanks Simon. :) Have a lovely day!

Hi Simon, I got a 8.5 for writing because of your website and I am so grateful to you. However, even till now, I still got a few questions bothering me for a long time:
1. Regarding one requirement in Band Descriptors "present a clear central topic within each paragraph" under "coherence and cohesion", does this mean that the common usage of "there are various reasons for xxxx" in a paragraph of either opinions or discussions type essay is incorrect? (because it seems to me that several reasons in a paragraph means there are more than one central topic, am I right?) Should we just focus on 1 reason instead of raising various reasons in each paragraph?
2. For "discuss both views and give your opinions" type essay, do I need to attack the opinion that I disagree with in a new paragraph after I have discussed both opinions? I always think that if I only explained both views without attacking the one that I disagree with in a new paragraph, the essay could not be persuasive or impartial. In conclusion, is my following essay structure for "discuss both views and give your own opinion" correct:
1. Introduction paragraph
2. Opinion 1
3. Opinion 2
4. Attack the opinion that I disagree with
5. Conclude that which opinion I agree with
Thanks for you patience.

1. If there was a ban on advertising, companies would find new solutions to advertise their products.
2. If there was a tax on unhealthy junk food, consumers' health care would be better.
3. If there were schools with no teachers, the fee would be slower than before.

1. If people banned on advertising, they would compare every stuff what thay what to buy.

2. If government overtaxed on unhealthy junk food, people would prefer to cook at home.

3. If schools operated without teachers, students would not concentrate the class.

Hi Simon.
Is it essential in essay of type "discuss both views" agree with one of views. Mostly I would prefer to overview pros and cons and suggest something in the middle. Such conception seems to me more interesting.
Do you think it's right or wrong strategy?
Thank you in advance.

1- If they were not religious, they would drink that night.
2- If the new government introduced a higher task on sugar, less children would be suffered from chronic deceases.
3- If computers replaced teacher, I would be confuses.

If government had banned advertising, a lot of corporations would have suffered a big loss of revenue.
If unhealthy junk food had been taxed, people would have eaten less this kind of food.
If teacher had been replaced by computers, the rate of students skipping classes would have increased greatly.

If the government had banned advertising , a large number of company would be lose their revenue .
If the government had raised tax of unhealthy junk food, perhaps many fast food chain would be closed
If the school did not have teachers , perhaps pupils would become lack of discipline.

If advertising were banned, there would be remarkable decrease in the price, but it would be more difficult to find out the new products, and the business would be suffered from the decline of interest. There would be no industry of advertisement, no promotion campaign, no sales..., and as a sequence many people would be in unemployment

1. If cigarette advertising banned on the television, the amount of hung cancer would fall.
2. A considerable amount of disease would be less if eating of junk food taxed.

Some government officials might regard advertising as misleading the civilians and suggested to ban it instead. If this were the case, we would probably have no idea about any commodity development in our society and that would be a waste of human intelligence from the ones who have contributed so much to make our society an advanced one.

If there were a ban on violent games, the cases of juvenile delinquency would fall dramatically.

There would be a significant fall in the number of obese teenagers if the fast food taxed heavily.

Should it be if this was the case instead of it this were the case? I'm kind of confused why we use were here.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)