Email

The answers stay short and direct ('It depends.') with plain, everyday vocabulary and little elaboration beyond the required example, typical of correct but unremarkable Band 6.5 spoken English.

Is email popular with everyone in your country?

Not really, no. Most people here use chat apps like Zalo for everything instead. My uncle, who runs a small restaurant, doesn't even have an email address — he's never needed one.

Why this band

• LR“Most people here use chat apps like Zalo for everything instead.” — This sentence relies entirely on high-frequency vocabulary — 'people', 'use', 'everything', 'instead' — with no attempt at a more precise collocation or hedge, which is the deliberate Band 6.5 profile: clear and accurate but plain. A 7.0 answer would likely soften 'everything' with a flexible hedge like 'pretty much everything', and a 7.5 answer might reach for a more specific or figurative phrase; here the directness actually serves the answer well, stating the fact about the uncle's restaurant and lack of an email address without any risk of a vocabulary error.

Do you send a lot of emails?

Quite a few for work, maybe five or six a day to clients. I hardly ever email friends — if I did, they'd probably think something was wrong.

Why this band

• LR“five or six a day” — This plain numeric estimate states the volume of emails with the most basic, high-frequency wording available, rather than reaching for a more precise or varied quantifier like 'a handful' or 'roughly half a dozen'. It is accurate and clear but shows no lexical stretch, which is exactly the plain-but-correct profile Band 6.5 targets — a higher band would likely vary this phrasing or attach a reason for why that particular number matters.

Do you prefer to email people or speak to them on the phone?

It depends. For anything official, like project details, I prefer email so there's a written record. For anything personal or urgent, I'd rather just call, because typing takes too long.

Why this band

• FC“It depends.” — Opening with the two-word 'It depends' is about as minimal and direct as a spoken answer can get, immediately signalling that the response will split into two contrasting cases (official versus personal messages) without any softening or elaboration. This blunt opening is typical of Band 6.5 fluency, where the priority is answering promptly and staying on topic rather than building toward a more developed or reflective opening the way a 7.5 answer might. It works here because the following two sentences do the actual explaining, so the terse start doesn't cost the answer any coherence.
• GRA“because typing takes too long” — The causal clause with 'because' gives a reason using the most basic subordinating conjunction available, and it's grammatically accurate but offers no variation — no 'since', no participial reduction, no embedded clause. This is the ceiling of Band 6.5 grammar: correct but unambitious, in contrast to a 7.0 answer that might vary the connector or add a short example, or a 7.5 answer that could fold the reason into a more complex structure like a relative or conditional clause. Even so, it correctly and economically justifies the speaker's preference for calling rather than emailing friends.

Do you think people will use email more or less in the future?

Less, I think, for daily chatting, since apps like Zalo are faster and easier. But email will probably stay important for work, like contracts and official messages that need to be kept.

Why this band

• GRA“since apps like Zalo are faster and easier” — The reason for chat apps overtaking email is given through a single, basic causal 'since' clause built on two plain coordinated adjectives, 'faster and easier'. A Band 7.0 or 7.5 answer would likely develop this reason further or use a more specific comparison; here the clause does its job accurately without elaboration, which is the modest, functional grammar typical of Band 6.5.

Each answer adds one clear example and a natural spoken connector ('That said'), and the conditional in the second answer shows comfortable, accurate complex grammar without reaching for anything unusual.

Is email popular with everyone in your country?

Not really, to be honest. Most people I know use Zalo for pretty much everything, even for things you'd expect to be an email, like sending a document to a colleague. My grandmother has never had an email address in her life and has never needed one.

Why this band

• LR“pretty much everything” — 'Pretty much' is a colloquial hedging intensifier that softens 'everything' into a natural approximation rather than a literal absolute claim — this is exactly the kind of flexible everyday phrase Band 7.0 lexical resource calls for, one notch above the plain 'basically everything' a 6.5 answer might use. A Band 7.5 answer would likely replace the vague quantifier with a sharper collocation or a concrete list (documents, bills, chats), but at 7.0 the hedge itself is enough to show comfortable, unforced control of spoken vocabulary while explaining why Zalo has displaced email for daily tasks.

Do you send a lot of emails?

A fair number, yes, but only for work. I probably send around eight or nine a day to clients, mostly to confirm details after a call. With friends, though, I basically never use it — if I emailed one of them, they'd think it was some kind of official notice.

Why this band

• GRA“if I emailed one of them, they'd think it was some kind of official notice” — This is a second conditional ('if I emailed... they'd think...') used to imagine a hypothetical, slightly absurd reaction from friends, and it's produced with full subject-verb-modal accuracy rather than the flatter 'because email feels too formal' a 6.5 speaker might default to. It stays a single, controlled clause rather than stacking on a further subordinate clause or a more literary inversion ('were I to email'), which is what would push it toward 7.5. The structure lets the speaker develop the point — email would look like an official notice — rather than just stating that friends don't use email.

Do you prefer to email people or speak to them on the phone?

It really depends on the situation. For anything that needs to be written down, like a contract or a project update, I'd rather email, because then there's a record of it. But if it's something more personal, or if I need an answer quickly, I'll just call, since typing it all out would take too long.

Why this band

• GRA“if it's something more personal, or if I need an answer quickly, I'll just call, since typing it all out would take too long.” — The sentence stacks a conditional clause with two alternative 'if' conditions ('something more personal' / 'need an answer quickly') and closes with a further 'since' reason clause, all controlled accurately in one breath. A Band 6.5 speaker would likely give just one reason in a shorter sentence, while a Band 7.5 answer might vary the connectors more, perhaps with a participial phrase instead of a second 'if'. The layered structure here directly supports the content — justifying two different triggers for calling instead of emailing — which is the natural, comfortable complexity Band 7.0 rewards.

Do you think people will use email more or less in the future?

I think people will use it less for everyday messages, since apps like Zalo are quicker and easier for that. That said, I doubt email will disappear completely, because it still feels like the proper way to send anything official, like contracts or important announcements at work.

Why this band

• FC“That said, I doubt email will disappear completely” — 'That said' is a natural spoken discourse marker that pivots from the first half of the answer (email declining for everyday use) to a qualifying counterpoint, doing the job a written 'however' or 'nevertheless' would do far more stiffly. Choosing a conversational connector over a formal transition is precisely the Band 7.0 fluency target — natural linking without sounding rehearsed — whereas a 6.5 answer would more likely just add a second sentence with 'but', and a 7.5 answer might fold the contrast into a single reflective sentence. Here it lets the speaker develop a second, connected idea (email surviving for contracts and announcements) instead of stopping at the first reason.

The third answer builds an extended, almost aphoristic contrast ('anything with numbers... anything with feelings') and the last answer closes with a tight, idiomatic final line, both signs of Band 7.5 lexical and grammatical range.

Is email popular with everyone in your country?

No, it's mostly for work and for dealing with foreign companies. In daily life almost everyone in Vietnam uses chat apps instead, including for things that would be emails elsewhere, like sending documents or contacting a business. My mother has an email address that she's opened perhaps twice, both times because a bank insisted.

Why this band

• FC“My mother has an email address that she's opened perhaps twice, both times because a bank insisted.” — This closing detail moves the answer from a general claim about Vietnam ('almost everyone... uses chat apps instead') to one specific, illustrative example, developing the idea concretely rather than just restating it. A Band 6.5 or 7.0 answer would likely stop at the general claim; the specific, slightly dry example about the mother's email account, used only under bank pressure, is the kind of vivid supporting detail and confident topic development expected at Band 7.5.

Do you send a lot of emails?

At work, yes — a dozen or so a day to clients, mostly confirming what was agreed in a call, because email is where decisions get recorded. To friends, never. If I emailed a friend they'd assume something was seriously wrong, or that I'd been hacked.

Why this band

• FC“To friends, never.” — This clipped, fragment-like sentence deliberately breaks from the fuller grammatical sentences around it to create emphasis and contrast with the earlier, more detailed description of work emails. A Band 6.5 or 7.0 answer would likely keep this as a complete sentence ('I never email my friends'), losing the rhythmic punch; here the fragment shows confident control over spoken pacing and delivery, the kind of flexible, natural coherence Band 7.5 rewards.

Do you prefer to email people or speak to them on the phone?

Email for anything with numbers in it, so there's a record, and the phone for anything with feelings in it, because tone doesn't survive text. A disagreement with a client by email can run for a week; the same thing on the phone takes five minutes and ends with both people laughing. I try to notice which kind of conversation I'm in.

Why this band

• LR“Email for anything with numbers in it, so there's a record, and the phone for anything with feelings in it, because tone doesn't survive text.” — The parallel structure ('anything with numbers in it' / 'anything with feelings in it') sets up an almost proverb-like contrast, built on abstract but precise vocabulary ('a record', 'tone doesn't survive text') rather than concrete everyday words. This kind of compact, quotable formulation — doing real conceptual work rather than simply listing two examples — is well beyond the flexible-but-plain vocabulary a 7.0 answer would use, and is a strong instance of the 'natural, less-common' lexical choice Band 7.5 targets. It also previews the rest of the answer, which goes on to justify exactly this numbers-versus-feelings distinction with the client-disagreement example.

Do you think people will use email more or less in the future?

Less for everyday contact and more as the formal layer, I think. Chat apps have taken the quick messages, and I'd expect that to continue. But something has to be the official record — the contract, the confirmation, the thing you can print — and email has quietly become what the paper letter used to be. It'll shrink, but it won't disappear.

Why this band

• LR“email has quietly become what the paper letter used to be” — This is a figurative comparison — mapping email's current social role onto the historical role of the paper letter — built with the adverb 'quietly' doing extra work to suggest a gradual, barely-noticed shift rather than a dramatic one. Reaching for an analogy like this, instead of simply stating 'email is now mainly used for formal things', is the kind of natural imagery Band 7.5 lexical resource explicitly rewards, in contrast to the more literal phrasing a 7.0 answer would use. It also sets up the payoff two sentences later ('it won't disappear'), so the image isn't decorative but structurally load-bearing.
• GRA“It'll shrink, but it won't disappear.” — Two short, grammatically parallel clauses joined by 'but', each using a contracted modal ('it'll' / 'it won't'), create a confident, rhythmic final beat that mirrors how a native speaker would actually deliver a closing judgement out loud. The parallelism and contraction together show flexible control over sentence rhythm rather than just grammatical accuracy — a 7.0 answer would more likely state the same idea in one longer, less musical sentence ('I think it will become less common but it won't completely disappear'). Coming right after the paper-letter comparison, it also gives the whole answer a tight, deliberate close rather than trailing off.