Some countries encourage teenagers to have part-time job and see it as a good thing, while others disagree. Give your opinion and explain both views.


Working less than customary hours for adolescents is considered valuable among many nations, however, this practice is not approved in many other areas around the world. I believe that the positive aspects of this attitude outweigh its negative ones.


On the one hand, having part-time occupations for youngsters can lead to lower performance and poor grades as they are less likely to have adequate amounts of time for their assignments or extracurricular activities. The second drawback is the probable unfair treatment by the employer which can have a negative impact on their outlook toward the work itself. Most individuals tend to consider the juvenile as if they are inferiors and this would not be an agreeable first impression. Lastly, balancing job and school might cause increased stress. Withstanding tense situations are not that easy for adults let alone the young.


On the other hand, by being employed for reasonable brief amounts of time, teenagers can gain helpful work experiences which are excellent for their future career and their resume. The second advantage of working part-time for the young is that they would learn how to sufficiently manage their funds. The money that have been earned through hard work is usually deemed more precious which lead to spending the resources more wisely. Lastly, the individuals who have worked from their early youth are normally more confident, more independent and more reliable than the ones who never have.


To summarize, I believe having a temporary occupation that involves less hours than a standard one can be favorable for adolescents, and the drawbacks of this practice are overwhelmed by its advantages.

Working less than customary hours for adolescents is considered valuable among many nations, however, this practice is not approved in many other areas around the world. I believe that the positive aspects of this attitude outweigh its negative ones.


On the one hand, Having part-time occupations for youngsters can lead to poor performance and lower grades as they are less likely to have adequate amounts of time for their assignments or extracurricular activities. The socond drawback is the probable unfair treatment by some employers which can have a negative impact on their outlook toward the work itself. Most individuals tend to consider the juvenile as if they are inferiors and this would not be an agreeable first impression for them. Lastly, balancing job and school might cause increased stress. Withstanding tense situations are not that easy for adults let alone the young.


On the other hand, by being employed for reasonable brief amounts of time, teenagers can gain helpful work experiences which are excellent for their future and resume. The second advantage of working part-time for the young is that they would learn how to sufficently manage their funds. The money that have been earned through hard work is usually deemed more precious which can lead to spending resources more prudently. Lastly, the individuals who worked from their early youth are normally more confident, more independent and more reliable than the ones who never have.


To summarize, I believe that having a temporary occupation that involves less hours than a standard one can be favorable for adolescents and the drawbacks of this practice are overwhelmed by its advantages.

Some countries encourage teenagers to have part-time jobs and see it as a good thing, while others disagree. Give your opinion and explain both views.


Working less than customary hours (??) for adolescents is considered valuable by among many nations, (incorrect punctuation) however, this practice is not approved in many other areas around the world. I believe that the positive aspects of this attitude teenagers having a job outweigh its negative ones.


On the one hand, having part-time employment occupations for youngsters (improper usage. youngsters are kids aged about 6 to 12. It is also an informal word.) can lead to lower performance and poor grades as they are less likely to have adequate amounts of time for their assignments or extracurricular activities. The second drawback is the probable unfair treatment by the employer which can have a negative impact on their outlook toward the work itself. Most individuals tend to consider the juvenile them inferior as if they are inferiors and this would not be an agreeable first impression. Lastly, balancing job and school might cause increased stress. Withstanding tense situations are This is not that easy for adults to handle, let alone the young.


On the other hand, by being employed for reasonable (wrong form) brief amounts of time, teenagers can gain helpful work experiences which are excellent for their future career and their resume. The second advantage of working part-time for the young is that they would learn how to sufficiently manage their money funds. The money that have been earned through hard work is usually deemed more precious, which lead (wrong form) to spending the resources more wisely. Lastly, the individuals who have worked from their early youth are normally more confident, more independent and more reliable than the ones who never have.


To summarize, I believe having a temporary employment occupation that involves less hours than a standard one full-time job can be favorable for adolescents, and the drawbacks of this practice are overwhelmed by its advantages.

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.

Hi ma'am, and thank you very much for your contribution.

"(improper usage. youngsters are kids aged about 6 to 12. It is also an informal word.)"

Does your advanced knowledge arise from being studious?

I couldn't find the information you provided in any dictionary that i have, is there any reliable book that i could learn from it?
You know sometimes i doubt the authenticity of materials on the Internet.
Can you kindly guide me to achieve a higher level in the usage of the vocabulary?

movoDoes your advanced knowledge arise from being studious?

No, it arises from being a native speaker all of my life and reading hundreds of books.

movoI couldn't find the information you provided in any dictionary that i have,

I know it from the way I see the word used. It is used in a context of comparing an adult to himself as a child, or a junior. If you are talking about "youngsters" as a group, it strongly suggests pre-teenagers. Here are some typical examples.

His parents abandoned him as a youngster, so he grew up with his aunt and uncle.
Even as a youngster in The Bronx, Mel Powell was a brilliantly advanced musician.
As a youngster, Obama collected Spider-Man and Conan the Barbarian comic books.
The wide-eyed youngster darted around the table, peering closely at the trains.
Arent said he drove a 1967 VW bus when he was a youngster in Southern California.
The winner, Sadie Escarcega, 48, has been making chile since she was a youngster.
Youngsters can take part in face painting or go for a spin on some kiddie rides.
The youngsters collect trash while teens use hand saws to cut down locust trees.

It sometimes compares adults to each other showing one behaves or seems much younger than the other:

Margaret, 83, just handed the presidency over to Dan Cronin, a youngster at 68.

AlpheccaStarsNo, it arises from being a native speaker all of my life and reading hundreds of books.

And therein lies the problem. I can easily say if a text is written by a native speaker, I have no problem to understanding the grammar, though not applying it correctly without effort, but when it comes to composing something I am completely lost.

I'm not quoting him but Nietzsche says that we are behind the bars of our language words, we are bound by them especially if we are not bilinguals. It is like when we grow with a language we are become one with the words, we sense them unconsciously, It's like that you have never smelled a rose. Doesn't matter how sophisticatedly someone describe that fragrance to you, you could never understand it unless you smell it yourself just like the pronunciation. And this is the true nature of problem learning another language or maybe our fundamental questions as deemed by analytical philosophers.

Then again I think it would be hard to make sure if a book is reliable, I read in the webster dictionary that even some Presidents of the United States pronounced the word "nuclear" incorrectly, but another question arises here and that is, if a native speaker uses an aspect of a language supposedly incorrectly, is it still, in fact, incorrect?!

Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
movobut another question arises here and that is, if a native speaker uses an aspect of a language supposedly incorrectly, is it still, in fact, incorrect?!

There is no answer to that because the language is always in a state of flux. Look at the incredible grammatical differences between Old English, a highly inflected Germanic language, Middle English, in which inflections are in the process of disappearing, Early Modern English, and contemporary English. We still have vestiges of the older forms, and they are now called "irregular." There was also a major change in pronunciation called the "Great Vowel Shift." Works which have silent letters today were once pronounced as they are spelled (knife began with a hard K sound). Vocabulary has changed dramatically. Words disappear, appear, and are co-opted for other meanings all the time. The OED captures the dynamics of the lexicon on a quarterly basis. - http://public.oed.com/the-oed-today/recent-updates-to-the-oed/september-2017-update/new-words-not... /

Then there is not one English. British and American English have differences in grammar. There are regional variations (speech patterns and vocabulary) over the US and in England. Indian English has retained a lot of the Victorian character of the English in vogue in the nineteenth century. Then there are non-standard dialects. African American Vernacular has a unique grammar for verb forms as well as pronunciation differences.

English, unlike French, has no language authority charged with the impossible task of maintaining the language's "purity" as if you could freeze a moving torrent to some prescriptive standard. So what is "incorrect"? Well it's a lot like pornography - We can't define it, but we know it when we see it.

True, illuminating and agreed.
Your last argument reminds me of the popular one regarding our moral decisions.

Just out of curiosity, do you in your country have professors who teach English Literature on higher levels of education?

I asked that because deep down in my heart I believe that non-native speakers can become just as good as native ones. It is somewhat like Zeno's paradoxes in my book. Theoretically, it seems impossible but I myself witnessed many instances.

movodo you in your country have professors who teach English Literature on higher levels of education?

Almost every college and university has an English department where literature is taught.

movo I believe that non-native speakers can become just as good as native ones.

Yes, they can. I lived in The Netherlands for a while, and most educated citizens spoke English like a native speaker - with a slight accent, of course. The key to speaking like a native is to start when you are young.

Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies