Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local people.
Why is this the case and what can be done to attract more local people to visit these places?
It is becoming increasingly common to see that the overall amount of viewer visiting museums and historical sites is covered mainly by foreigners, instead of local people. Some explanations will be put forward before solutions can be drawn to tackle this problem.
There are several reasons why this case is depending on two mentioned types of visitors. In fact, people who live in the neighborhood assume going to those places would be a waste of time and money paying for the entrance cost. Moreover, because the layout of museums and historical house is likely to remain unchanged through years, they can be visually unattractive to the local inhabitants, who may have been to these sites for at least once in earlier years. In addition, tourists from other places tending to pay a visit to museums appear to satisfy their curiosity. These locations can provide them with a comprehensive overview of the traditions in the particular locality.
Some measures can be taken to appeal more domestic people to visit historical sites. First, government should invest in the development and innovation of those places with more decoration and ornate designs of the interior. Such annually historical events should be held for the sake of not only appreciating the traditional value of the country, but also increase the number of the local who come to enjoy wonderful time. Besides, should entry costth be specially reduced or cut off for loclal residences, for instance, at HCM’s masoleum, visitors with identification card proving to be Vietnamese would be able to get in gratis.
In conclusion, historical areas and museums can be uninteresting for local citizens because they can be too familiar with the culture that these places depict and actions should be taken to encourage people to go to such places.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 41, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...There are several reasons why this case is depending on two mentioned types of visitors. In ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, if, may, moreover, so, at least, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1528.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 296.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16216216216 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8081051817 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60472972973 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 485.1 506.74238477 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.1799983594 49.4020404114 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.333333333 106.682146367 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6666666667 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.08333333333 7.06120827912 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.394153663064 0.244688304435 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135819500339 0.084324248473 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0769857331658 0.0667982634062 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.249117782875 0.151304729494 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0422314919921 0.056905535591 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: 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.