Answer: 1. The author’s argument is that emoticons are not ruining language, but can be beneficial.
2. The author claims that emoticons can be used to convey emotion, add emphasis, and be used in creative ways to make language more expressive.
3. The author provides the reasons that emoticons can be used to convey emotion, add emphasis, and be used in creative ways to make language more expressive.
4. The author’s reasons support the claims well. For example, the author states that emoticons can be used “to add emphasis to words that might otherwise be misinterpreted.” This shows that emoticons can be used to add emphasis, which supports the claim that emoticons can be used for this purpose.
5. The author uses examples of emoticons to support the reasons. For example, the author states that “the winking smiley face (;) ) can be used to add emphasis to a playful comment.” This example shows that emoticons can be used to add emphasis, which supports the reason that emoticons can be used for this purpose.
6. The evidence does support the reasons. The author provides enough evidence to support the reasons, as the example provided
7. The author's argument is quite strong, as they provide evidence to suggest that emoticons do not necessarily ruin language. They note that there is no hard evidence to suggest that emoticons have a negative impact on language, and point out that the use of emoticons is a form of communication that has been around for centuries. Additionally, the author argues that emoticons can be used to express emotions and sentiment that would be difficult to express in words, providing a valuable tool for communication. The author's argument is weakened, however, by the fact that they do not provide any direct evidence or research to back up their claims. Additionally, they do not address the potential long-term effects of the widespread use of emoticons on language.
Step-by-step explanation: