Textual cohesion operates through linguistic mechanisms that articulate the elements of the text and contribute to the construction of meaning by the reader in the English language. Regarding textual cohesion, mark T for the true statements and F for the false statements:

(__) The use of pronouns such as "he", "she", "it", and "they" contributes to referential cohesion by resuming terms mentioned previously in the text.

(__) The integral repetition of nouns, word by word, configures the main mechanism of textual cohesion indicated for academic texts in the English language.

(__) Connectors such as "however", "therefore", and "moreover" establish logical relations between clauses and paragraphs, articulating ideas throughout the written text.

(__) Lexical substitution by synonyms and equivalent expressions compromises the clarity of the exposition and configures a resource to be avoided in contemporary proposals of written text production.

After analysis, choose the alternative that presents the correct sequence of the items above, from top to bottom:

Conjunctions in English establish different relations between clauses, such as addition, contrast, cause, and consequence. Consider the sentence: "She studied hard for the exam, ___ she got a low grade." Choose the alternative that presents the conjunction that appropriately fills the gap, establishing a relation of contrast between the two clauses.

The word “however” in the text indicates an idea of: 

In the first paragraph of the text I, the author writes: “Although Yang's flight received considerable attention around the globe, what was almost ignored is the fact that...”. In the third paragraph, the text states: “Although most of these stories are false, it would be in America's best interest if they are true...”. Regarding the use of the connective “Although” in both excerpts, it is CORRECT to state that:

Choose the connector that best completes the sentence:

"He studied hard for the exam; ___, he did not achieve the expected results." 

Discourse markers and connectors are vital for the logical progression of ideas, establishing relations such as concession, causality, and addition. In the context of formal written English, mark the CORRECT alternative

In classroom writing, linkers shape how readers connect ideas across sentences. Analyze the statements.
I. Linkers can create cohesion by making relations explicit, yet coherence also depends on how ideas develop across the paragraph.
II. However commonly signals contrast and, when placed at the start of a clause, it is typically followed by a comma in standard writing.
III. Because tends to introduce reasons, while so tends to introduce results, and swapping them can shift the direction of cause and effect.
IV. Replacing a contrast linker with an addition linker keeps meaning stable when both clauses share the same topic.
V. Cohesion is achieved mainly by increasing the number of linkers, because more connectors reduce ambiguity in any paragraph.
The CORRECT statements are:

“Despite this” (2^nd paragraph) is close in meaning to: 

The first word in “Yet, research shows that there is still work to be done” (10^th paragraph) can be replaced, without significant change of meaning, by: 

In the sentence: "The 'secrecy criterion' is a litmus test; nevertheless, some critics argue it leads to surveillance." the connector "nevertheless" introduces a relation of: 

Identify the alternative where the underlined/ bolded linking word can replace the underlined word in the sentence below without altering the original logical relationship or requiring structural changes to the sentence.
"The candidate possessed all the necessary technical qualifications for the executive position; nevertheless, he was not selected by the board of directors due to a perceived lack of cultural fit."

“Educational leaders must evaluate ______ the epistemological transformations prompted by AImediated instruction ______ the ethical, legal, and socio-economic ramifications that accompany its systemic integration into formal schooling structures.” (Excerpt adapted from: Brookings Institution [2022]. “AI in Education: Promise and Pitfalls”)
The correlative structure that ensures syntactic parallelism and semantic coordination between equivalent noun phrases is:

“There’s a growing international consensus echoed by calls to action that teachers are essential players as learners develop AI literacy. Despite growing resources, the development of AI technology continues to outpace implementation support and essential training for teachers.” (paragraph 3)
The discourse marker “despite” is strategically employed to:

In the extract from the second paragraph “This position involves duties such as”, the underlined expression introduces

In English, a Coordinating Conjunction is a word that joins two elements of equal grammatical rank and syntactic importance. About this, choose the only alternative with Coordinating Conjunctions:

Coordinating conjunctions coordinate or join two or more sentences, main clauses, words, or other parts of speech which are of the same syntactic importance. Also known as

Can the subaltern speak?
Gayatri Spivak
        Some of the most radical criticism coming out of the West today is the result of an interested desire to conserve the subject of the West, or the West as Subject. The theory of pluralized ‘subject-effects’ gives an illusion of undermining subjective sovereignty while often providing a cover for this subject of knowledge. Although the history of Europe as Subject is narrativized by the law, political economy, and ideology of the West, this concealed Subject pretends it has ‘no geo-political determinations.’ The much-publicized critique of the sovereign subject thus actually inaugurates a Subject. I will argue for this conclusion by considering a text by two great practitioners of the critique: ‘Intellectuals and power: a conversation between Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze.
        I have chosen this friendly exchange between two activist philosophers of history because it undoes the opposition between authoritative theoretical production and the unguarded practice of conversation, enabling one to glimpse the track of ideology. The participants in this conversation emphasize the most important contributions of French poststructuralist theory: first, that the networks of power/desire/interest are so heterogeneous, that their reduction to a coherent narrative is counterproductive – a persistent critique is needed; and second, that intellectuals must attempt to disclose and know the discourse of society’s Other. Yet the two systematically ignore the question of ideology and their own implication in intellectual and economic history.
        Although one of its chief presuppositions is the critique of the sovereign subject, the conversation between Foucault and Deleuze is framed by two monolithic and anonymous subjects-in-revolution: ‘A Maoist’ (FD, p. 205) and ‘the workers’ struggle’ (FD, p. 217). Intellectuals, however, are named and differentiated; moreover, a Chinese Maoism is nowhere operative. Maoism here simply creates an aura of narrative specificity, which would be a harmless rhetorical banality were it not that the innocent appropriation of the proper name ‘Maoism’ for the eccentric phenomenon of French intellectual ‘Maoism’ and subsequent ‘New Philosophy’ symptomatically renders ‘Asia’ transparent.
        Deleuze’s reference to the workers’ struggle is equally problematic; it is obviously a genuflection: ‘We are unable to touch [power] in any point of its application without finding ourselves confronted by this diffuse mass, so that we are necessarily led… to the desire to blow it up completely. Every partial revolutionary attack or defense is linked in this way to the workers’ struggle’ (FD, p. 217). The apparent banality signals a disavowal. The statement ignores the international division of labor, a gesture that often marks poststructuralist political theory. 3 The invocation of the workers’ struggle is baleful in its very innocence; it is incapable of dealing with global capitalism: the subject-production of worker and unemployed within nation-state ideologies in its Center; the increasing subtraction of the working class in the Periphery from the realization of surplus value and thus from ‘humanistic’ training in consumerism; and the large-scale presence of paracapitalist labor as well as the heterogeneous structural status of agriculture in the Periphery. Ignoring the international division of labor; rendering ‘Asia’ (and on occasion ‘Africa’) transparent (unless the subject is ostensibly the ‘Third World’); reestablishing the legal subject of socialized capital – these are problems as common to much poststructuralist as to structuralist theory. Why should such occlusions be sanctioned in precisely those intellectuals who are our best prophets of heterogeneity and the Other? [...].
Available in: https://archive.org/stream/CanTheSubalternSpeak/Can_the_subaltern_speak_djvu.txt. Acess on: Jan. 25, 2026.
Considering the sentences, regarding the highlighted (underlined) discourse marker,
I. [...] first, that the networks of power/desire/interest are so heterogeneous, that their reduction to a coherent narrative is counterproductive [...]
II. Although one of its chief presuppositions is the critique of the sovereign subject, [...]
III. [...] moreover, a Chinese Maoism is nowhere operative [...]
IV. Intellectuals, however, are named and differentiated [...]
V. Why should such occlusions be sanctioned in precisely those intellectuals who are our best prophets of heterogeneity and the Other?
it is found that only the following are correct