Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.
Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
Throughout the human history, towns and villages have witnessed the evolution of the most important society’s traditions. Now, after thousands of years, it has been claimed that the largest cities in one country should be particularly supported from their government; the reason for this statement is that the traditions and costumes of a culture are primarily conceived within the major cities. Therefore, they should be provided with the financial aid they need. While it is undeniably true that the most important metropolises give home to a high percentage of the overall population of a country, and thus, they offer much more services than smaller villages and they should be particularly supported by the government, it is not equally valid that traditions are just maintained in the biggest cities.
In fact, the opposite is generally true. Think of Japan; the most important city in Japan, Tokyo, has been reached by globalization and, while the unique Japanese costumes can be found in many temples throughout the external neighborhoods of the city, the city in general is now a mixture of offices and big buildings, far from the ideal of calmness and peaceful Buddhist meditation that represents the original Japanese traditions.
Of course, this is not the reason for the Japanese government – or, in general, for any governmental agency – not to fund the city’s needs in the most adequate way, though the government’s finances should also be directed towards the real sources of traditional costumes, such as the smaller villages near Nara and Kyoto, which should be kept in their original state in order to really preserve the original atmosphere.
Nonetheless, this reasoning can lead to the wrong direction if we do not think about the specific history of a country. The example made above is valid for Japan, which society has long been closed to external influences. Italy is a different example; in fact, even the major cities in Italy are not as big as New York City or Tokyo, though Rome, which is the capital, is home to the most relevant Italian history and its traditions are still today kept alive in its narrow streets and little squares. The same holds for the small towns and villages near the Roman area and in Tuscany, which are for the most part empty – people have now slowly migrated to more populated and accessible areas – but they are excellent examples of how life was a few centuries ago.
In addition, not only the smaller cities should be funded too, but some of those may require special attention from the government. Indeed, especially in Germany (think about Dresden, for example) the smaller cities are the most important ones in terms of need to thrive, since they usually host one large university and are populated mainly by students that should be one of the main priorities when managing governmental funds.
Therefore, it can not be stated, without examining the specific case, whether the society’s traditions are preserved in bigger or smaller agglomerates of people. Certainly, preserving the traditions and costumes is fundamental to maintain the sense of cohesion and nationalism that holds together a country and determines its flourishment; thereby, governments should take this issue, and the fact that sometimes traditions come from the smallest and forgotten towns, into account when assessing their yearly budgets.
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'if', 'may', 'nonetheless', 'really', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'thus', 'while', 'for example', 'in addition', 'in fact', 'in general', 'of course', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.228434504792 0.240241500013 95% => OK
Verbs: 0.130990415335 0.157235817809 83% => OK
Adjectives: 0.115015974441 0.0880659088768 131% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0750798722045 0.0497285424764 151% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0271565495208 0.0444667217837 61% => OK
Prepositions: 0.124600638978 0.12292977631 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0399361022364 0.0406280797675 98% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.81831608218 2.79330140395 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0143769968051 0.030933414821 46% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.102236421725 0.0997080785238 103% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0191693290735 0.0249443105267 77% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0159744408946 0.0148568991511 108% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3416.0 2732.02544248 125% => OK
No of words: 553.0 452.878318584 122% => OK
Chars per words: 6.17721518987 6.0361032391 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.58838876751 106% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.372513562387 0.366273622748 102% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.30198915009 0.280924506359 107% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.227848101266 0.200843997647 113% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.142857142857 0.132149295362 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81831608218 2.79330140395 101% => OK
Unique words: 281.0 219.290929204 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508137432188 0.48968727796 104% => OK
Word variations: 62.0162818268 55.4138127331 112% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6194690265 73% => OK
Sentence length: 36.8666666667 23.380412469 158% => OK
Sentence length SD: 121.385702984 59.4972553346 204% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 227.733333333 141.124799967 161% => OK
Words per sentence: 36.8666666667 23.380412469 158% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.13333333333 0.674092028746 168% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.94800884956 121% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.21349557522 0% => OK
Readability: 67.0655816757 51.4728631049 130% => OK
Elegance: 1.68493150685 1.64882698954 102% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.432668980655 0.391690518653 110% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.127690122847 0.123202303941 104% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0644213122109 0.077325440228 83% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.66832942534 0.547984918172 122% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.200591906388 0.149214159877 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.210533106602 0.161403998019 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0754612010385 0.0892212321368 85% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.441092434121 0.385218514788 115% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0735690627598 0.0692045440612 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.300707499093 0.275328986314 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0421570276408 0.0653680567796 64% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.4325221239 105% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.30420353982 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88274336283 61% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 7.22455752212 138% => OK
Negative topic words: 0.0 3.66592920354 0% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.70907079646 74% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 13.5995575221 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.