ONE SENTENCE REPEAT YOUR RESPONSE IN A DIFFERENT WAY

Today, I'd like to share a 'band 9' sample essay for the question below.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very

small numbers of people. Some people say that governments should spend public

money on saving these languages, while others believe that would be a waste of

money.

Discuss both these views and give your opinion.

It is true that some minority languages may disappear in the near future. Although it

can be argued that governments could save money by allowing this to happen, I

believe that these languages should be protected and preserved.

There are several reasons why saving minority languages could be seen as a waste of

money. Firstly, if a language is only spoken by a small number of people, expensive

education programmes will be needed to make sure that more people learn it, and the

state will have to pay for facilities, teachers and marketing. This money might be

better spent on other public services. Secondly, it would be much cheaper and more

efficient for countries to have just one language. Governments could cut all kinds of

costs related to communicating with each minority group.

Despite the above arguments, I believe that governments should try to preserve

languages that are less widely spoken. A language is much more than simply a means

of communication; it has a vital connection with the cultural identity of the people

who speak it. If a language disappears, a whole way of life will disappear with it, and

we will lose the rich cultural diversity that makes societies more interesting. By

spending money to protect minority languages, governments can also preserve

traditions, customs and behaviours that are part of a country’s history.

In conclusion, it may save money in the short term if we allow minority languages to

disappear, but in the long term this would have an extremely negative impact on our

cultural heritage.

(258 words)

35

Takuya wrote to me about an interesting cultural difference:

"In Japan, students are told to correct their work using an eraser. They are not allowed

to insert words or cross words out."

This is not true in the IELTS exam. You don't need to waste time using an eraser.

Your writing needs to be clear, but not perfect.

Usually the question tells you to "discuss both views" or it asks whether you "agree or

disagree". However, sometimes the question looks different:

Competitiveness is considered to be a positive quality among people.

How does competitiveness affect individuals?

Is competitiveness a positive or negative quality?

Notice that the question above gives you the topic (competitiveness) and then two

questions. I call this a "two-part" question.

For this kind of question, just write 4 paragraphs (see below), and make sure you

write an equal amount for paragraphs 2 and 3.