Learner concedes a genuine point while keeping the position intact, going beyond the sentence-level concession taught at Band 6→7.
Preview · progress not saved — Chapter 1 is free
Six sentences, one concede-and-hold structure. The order is the argument.
These six sentences form one paragraph arguing for a city light rail line. Put them in order. Two things will help: the concession has to be named before it can be answered, and the phrase that points backwards cannot come before the material it points at.
Two writers concede the same point. One of them has just lost the argument.
Both writers are arguing that a city should build a light rail line. Both face the same objection: it is very expensive.
A. Admittedly, the initial cost is very high, and this is a serious problem for the case. However, I still believe the line should be built.
B. To be sure, the initial cost is very high. It is also a single outlay against a benefit that recurs for fifty years, which is the comparison a thirty-year appraisal is designed to make.
Which writer still holds their position?
B does. And notice that B conceded more, not less — B did not hedge the cost, did not call it relatively high, did not say some might argue. B agreed flatly.
The three reasons a conceded point can fail to decide a question — and the phrase that is not an opener at all.
Move 2 is not improvisation. A conceded point can fail to decide a question in exactly three ways, and once you can name them you will find one available almost every time.
1 — SCALE. True, but smaller than what it is weighed against.
To be sure, the initial cost is high. It is also a single outlay against a benefit that recurs for fifty years.
The objection is real and it is simply outweighed. This is the commonest of the three and the easiest to write, because it usually needs only a comparison.
2 — SCOPE. True, but only in a subset of the cases the argument covers.
Whatever its merits as a general principle, the objection holds only where public transport is already adequate — which is not the situation under discussion.
The objection is real somewhere else. You have not denied it; you have located it.
3 — REMEDY. True, but fixable, and fixing it does not touch the main case.
True enough, the charge falls hardest on the lowest earners. That is an argument for exemptions, not against the charge.
The objection identifies a defect in the implementation, not in the principle. Be careful with this one — it only works if the remedy is genuinely available and cheap. If fixing it would cost more than the scheme is worth, the objection stands.
The same concession made twice. Whether it costs you anything depends on where the ground was.
Left: the conceded point was holding the conclusion up. Right: it was standing beside it.
Three chains on the size of the concession. Conceding too little is as costly as conceding too much.
Chain 1
Your position: a congestion charge should be introduced. The objection: it falls hardest on the lowest earners, who are least able to absorb it.
You have checked, and the city's own scheme includes an exemption for households below a stated income.
Candidates: to be sure / whatever its merits
Step 1 — Which of the three reasons does that exemption make available?
Step 2 — Therefore the expert writes: , the charge falls hardest on the lowest earners. That is an argument for the exemption the scheme already contains, not against the charge.
Chain 2
Your position: a congestion charge should be introduced. The objection: it is an environmental measure that will do very little for air quality, since the projected reduction is 1.2 per cent.
You do not want to argue about air quality at all. Your case rests on street space and journey reliability.
Candidates: that much is clear / whatever its merits
Step 1 — Are you disputing the air-quality point, or moving the argument somewhere else?
Step 2 — Therefore the expert writes: as an environmental measure, the charge is chiefly a way of rationing a scarce street.
Chain 3
You have just written three sentences conceding that a school reform was rushed, poorly communicated and unpopular with the teachers who had to deliver it. You now want to turn.
Candidates: to be sure / for all that
Step 1 — Does the phrase you need open a concession, or close one?
Step 2 — Therefore the expert writes: , attainment in the affected year groups rose in each of the three following years.