Back to the on-screen lesson ·
Most writing is not an argument, and the word because is doing one of two completely different jobs.
Paper packet. Every task here also exists on screen, where it is checked automatically; answers written on paper are not assessed by Nydus. When you are back at a device, enter your answers there.
You will decide, of any short passage, whether it argues for something, reports what is so, or says what brought something about — and you will do it by asking whether anything in the passage is in doubt rather than by looking for the word because. You will then mark the premises and conclusion of the argument inside a notice that is mostly report.
The bus schedule changed on Monday.
The bus now leaves eight minutes earlier than it used to.
The walk from the apartments to the stop takes six minutes.
So anyone catching it from the apartments should be out the door before half past.
The change was made because the work on the bridge finished early.
The hall is cold in the mornings and the caretaker has been asked about it twice.
The heating comes on at seven and the doors are opened at half past six.
Half an hour of open doors takes out more heat than the boiler puts back in that time.
The doors should not be opened before the heating starts.
Lost property is cleared out at the end of every month.
The next clear-out is three weeks away.
A coat left in the hall this week will still be there on Friday.
The box was moved into the office because the hall floods when it rains hard.
You can find the conclusion of a passage that has one. This lesson adds the question you should ask first: does this passage have one at all? Most writing does not, and treating a report as an argument is the quickest way to attack somebody who was not arguing.
| Term | What it means |
|---|---|
| Report | A statement of what is or was the case, without necessarily offering supporting reasons. |
| Explanation | An account of why or how something happened or holds. |
| Argument | Claims offered as reasons for accepting another claim. |
| Context | The surrounding question and information that help determine what a passage is doing. |
Put the same fact in three sentences and it does three different jobs.
The word because appears in the last two and means something different in each. So the word cannot be the test. The test is: is the first part in doubt? If it is, what follows because is evidence. If it is not, what follows because is a cause.
This matters beyond tidiness. If you read an explanation as an argument you will start demanding evidence for something nobody disputed, and if you read an argument as a report you will let a claim past without ever asking what it rests on.
Another way: picture
Put a question mark over the sentence. If the question mark belongs there — somebody might really say is that so? — the passage needs an argument, and you can go looking for one. If the question mark is absurd, the sentence after because is a cause and there is nothing to evaluate as support.
Another way: steps
Two questions, in this order:
Most real notices are mixtures, and the mixture is normal rather than sneaky.
The schedule changed on Monday. The bus now leaves eight minutes earlier. The walk from the apartments takes six minutes. So anyone catching it from the apartments should leave before half past. The change was made because the bridge work finished early.
Five sentences: news, premise, premise, conclusion, explanation. Only two of them are doing any supporting, and the last one — the sentence with because in it — is doing none. It tells you why the schedule moved, which is not a reason to leave the house earlier.
The question 'Why?' is incomplete until we know what the speaker wants. A person looking at a dark building might ask why the lights are off. They may want to know what caused the darkness: perhaps a timer switched the lights off at closing time. Someone far away, who cannot see the building, might instead ask why we believe the lights are off. They need evidence: perhaps the security camera shows a dark room. The timer and the camera image answer different questions, even though either answer might begin with because.
One practical way to find the question is to supply the missing words. Try 'What brought this event about?' and then 'What reason do we have to believe this claim?' The first invites an explanation. The second invites an argument. A report can simply state that the lights are off without attempting either task. It remains possible to ask for evidence for a report, but the fact that evidence could be requested does not mean the report already contains an argument. We classify what the passage does, not every conversation that could follow it.
The earlier question about doubt is a useful starting point, but do not interpret it literally as a test of whether any human could disagree. Someone can dispute almost any claim, including a weather report. Conversely, an author can argue for something that the audience already accepts, perhaps to show how it follows from other knowledge. What matters is how the passage presents the claims: is one claim being supported as something to believe, or is an accepted event being given a cause? Actual disagreement is neither required for an argument nor enough to create one.
Consider two versions of a caretaker's note. Version A says, 'The corridor is wet because the upstairs pipe burst.' In a discussion where everyone has seen the wet floor, the sentence explains its condition. Version B says, 'The corridor must be wet because the upstairs pipe has burst and water is running through the ceiling.' In a discussion where nobody has entered the corridor, the pipe and running water are offered as evidence for a prediction. The same physical cause appears in both versions. Its role in the communication changes.
Do not assume that a cause cannot also be evidence. Smoke can be evidence of a fire; fire can explain smoke. Which direction is appropriate depends on the claim the writer is trying to establish. A scientific explanation can also be supported by an argument: measurements may be evidence that a particular mechanism caused an observed event. In that case, separate the explanatory claim from the reasons offered for accepting it. You can have an argument for an explanation, rather than being forced to label an entire document with only one word.
Sometimes the text is genuinely ambiguous. 'The room is warm because the heating is on' could explain warmth already felt or predict warmth from a known heating setting. If an exercise supplies no surrounding context, state the two readings and the additional information needed to choose between them. If context is supplied, use it. An accurate reader does not invent a disagreement or an observation merely to make a preferred label fit. The skill is to identify the communicative relation that the available text actually supports.
Real notices often combine reporting, explaining, and arguing. Imagine a notice with six sentences: the pool closes at six today; a filter broke this morning; the repair team arrives tomorrow; the closure happened because the water could not be circulated; nobody should travel to the pool tonight; the booking office can arrange another session. The notice reports a schedule, offers an explanation of the closure, gives practical information, and contains a recommendation. Calling all six sentences an argument misses those differences.
Begin by recording the recommendation in its own words: do not travel to the pool tonight. Then identify the fact that supports it: the pool closes at six. Depending on the time under discussion, the delayed repair may supply further support that the closure will continue. The explanation about circulation tells us why the pool closed. It can help us understand the situation without being an additional independent reason for every claim in the notice. The booking-office sentence offers an alternative action; whether it is also support for the recommendation depends on how the notice connects them.
Keep three questions apart as you annotate. What happened? What caused it? What should we believe or do on the basis of it? Underline the exact sentence that answers each question. Then draw only the arrows the author offers. An arrow saying 'supports believing' is not the same as one saying 'causes'. If the exercise asks for premises and a conclusion, include the first kind. You are not being asked to draw every relationship between the events mentioned in the passage.
This distinction prevents a common error in disagreement. Suppose a classmate says that a team lost because its goalkeeper was injured. Replying 'You have not proved that the team lost' may miss the point if both of you watched the match. The unsettled issue is the explanation: did the injury make the difference? A more relevant response asks about the match, the replacement, and other causes. You can challenge an explanation while accepting the event it explains. The distinction directs criticism toward the actual claim that needs support.
Another error is treating every reason for action as a physical cause. 'We should close the side gate because delivery trucks are reversing beside it' offers a consideration in favor of closing the gate. The trucks do not mechanically cause the gate to close; someone must decide to close it. Reasons for choices can involve safety, convenience, fairness, or a stated goal. They still form arguments when they are offered to support a recommendation. An explanation of why a person made a choice is a further question about that person's motives.
You can check your classification by changing only one sentence. Begin with 'The rehearsal ended at eight.' This is a report. Add 'because the hall booking expired then' and, in an agreed account of the evening, it becomes an explanation. Change the first clause to 'The rehearsal probably ended at eight' and cite a booking record as evidence, and it becomes an argument for an inference. The test shows why surface vocabulary is not enough. Meaning comes from the role of one claim in relation to another and from the context in which the writer presents them.
A community center's fictional incident sheet contains the following details: the lift stopped at 14:10, two people were helped out at 14:25, and a technician later found a damaged door sensor. The coordinator needs to tell visitors what happened and decide whether to reopen the lift. This task brings three uses of language together without making them interchangeable.
The sentence 'The lift stopped at 14:10 and the passengers left at 14:25' reports events. It does not itself explain why the lift stopped. The sentence 'The damaged sensor interrupted the lift's operation' proposes an explanation. It needs support from the technician's findings; the mere fact that a sensor was damaged does not automatically establish every detail of the causal story. In a real setting, qualified staff would determine whether the equipment is safe. The lesson is about interpreting the claims in the report, not about making that technical judgment.
Now consider the proposed notice: 'Visitors should use the stairs or request assistance until the inspection is complete, because the lift has not yet been cleared for use.' That is an argument for a temporary instruction. The lack of clearance is offered as a reason for the recommendation. The time 14:10 identifies the incident, but it is not by itself a reason that the restriction should continue.
The coordinator's summary can therefore keep the three jobs visible: report the times, identify the proposed explanation with its evidential status, and state the supported temporary instruction. This avoids presenting an unverified cause as settled fact or mistaking an instruction for a mere description of what already happened.
*Reading because as a premise marker every time.* It can introduce a reason for believing a claim, or a cause offered to explain an event.
Calling a passage an argument because it is about something contested. A list of facts about a contested subject is still a list of facts. What makes an argument is one sentence being offered for another.
Demanding evidence for an explanation. The lift stopped because a sensor failed can be wrong, and you can ask how they know. But you ask that about the sensor, not about the lift — the lift's stopping was never the thing being argued for.
Read the payment count on its own.
Nine people have paid for the trip.
This sentence reports a count without offering evidence for a further claim.
Add an account of how the count became low.
Only nine paid because the invitation went out late.
In a discussion accepting the count, the late invitation is offered as a cause.
Change the target from payments to attendance.
Only nine will attend because only nine have paid.
Attendance is now being inferred from the observed payment count.
Record the support relation in the third notice.
Payment count → predicted attendance count.
The payments are offered as evidence for a different claim about attendance.
Classify without endorsing the prediction.
Report; explanation; argument, respectively.
Calling the third notice an argument leaves open whether unpaid guests might still attend.
Read the three agreed observations.
Heating starts at seven; doors open at six thirty; people experience a cold hall.
In this context the writer is initially recording conditions everyone has observed.
Check whether a recommendation has been stated.
No proposed change appears in those three sentences.
Facts can be relevant to a future argument without already stating its conclusion.
Add the writer's proposed action.
So keep the doors closed until seven.
This introduces a claim the facts are now offered to support.
Mark the reasons connected to the proposal.
Early door opening and late heating support the revised opening time.
The timing facts connect the proposed change to the cold interval.
Describe what changed in the passage.
A report now contains an argument for a new opening time.
The added conclusion gives the earlier claims a supporting role.
Read the stated clearing rule.
The lost-property box is emptied on the first Monday of the month.
A rule can supply a premise about how long an item will remain.
Record the current date information.
The next clearing day is two weeks away.
The rule alone cannot locate this week's Friday relative to the next clearing.
Find the inferred retention claim.
A coat left this week will still be there on Friday, assuming nobody collects it.
The timing facts are offered as reasons to accept this prediction.
Read an added sentence about the box's location.
The box was moved because the lobby was painted.
This sentence explains an accepted move rather than establishing the retention prediction.
Draw only the support relation requested.
Clearing rule + next clearing date → coat remains through Friday.
The painting explanation is a separate relation between events.
State the passage's mixed character.
It contains an argument about retention and an explanation of relocation.
Different sentences can perform different jobs within one notice.
Read the accepted event and its proposed cause.
The lock was replaced because the old key kept sticking.
When the replacement is accepted, this supplies an explanation of why it happened.
Read the uncertain event and its offered evidence.
The lock must have been replaced because the old key no longer turns.
Here the failure of the key supports an inference that the lock changed.
Separate classification from strength.
The first notice reports a change and argues for something as well. Mark the premises and the conclusion of the argument in it.
Underline the premises and circle the conclusion in the passage above.
1. The delivery arrived at noon. 2. It arrived late because the bridge was closed. 3. The boxes should be checked now. 4. The driver can collect damaged goods only until one. Complete the argument map using sentence numbers.
Find the recommendation.
Conclusion sentence c.
Checking the boxes is the action being proposed.
Find the time-sensitive reason.
Premise sentence p.
The collection deadline gives a reason to check immediately.
Find the separate causal explanation.
Explanation sentence e.
The bridge closure explains an accepted delay, rather than supporting the checking recommendation.
A notice reads: *Forty-one photographs were pinned up on Monday. Nine were of the trip, twelve were of the match and the rest were of the garden. Two had fallen off by Wednesday.* Which sentence is it arguing for?
Four short notices. Match each one to what it is doing.
| Arguing: it offers reasons for something in question | Reporting: it says what is so | Explaining: it says what brought something about | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Only two people hold a key, and both were away, so nobody can have got in. | |||
| Lunch is at half past twelve on Wednesdays this semester. | |||
| The lift stopped on Friday because a sensor on the second floor failed. | |||
| Forty-one photographs went up on Monday and two had fallen off by Wednesday. |
The second notice has no marker word in it at all. Mark its premises and its conclusion.
Underline the premises and circle the conclusion in the passage above.
The last notice has an argument in it and a sentence that only says why something happened. Mark the premises and the conclusion.
Underline the premises and circle the conclusion in the passage above.
Lesson test: one question per skill, one attempt each, no hints. Your answers are checked when you submit.
1. The archive opened at ten. 2. It opened late because a key had gone missing. 3. Reserve books online before traveling. 4. Two of the three reading rooms are closed this week. Enter the sentence numbers of the recommendation, its offered reason, and the causal explanation.
Recommendation c; reason p; explanation e.
You can tell an argument from a report and from an explanation, and say why the same word because can introduce evidence or a cause. Explain which claim needs evidence when someone says the lift stopped because a sensor failed: the stopping, the sensor failure, or the proposed causal link. Next: the premise an argument needs and never says.
14. Two notices about a lock, step 3
The second is an argument, but a jammed old lock is another possible explanation.
An argument need not be conclusive in order to count as an argument.