A country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly when its population includes a mixture of nationalities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of a country becomes more interesting and develops more quickly when its population includes a mixture of nationalities and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complicated procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive. I am inclined to believe that the mixture of nationalities in a country depends on the population developing can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, the developing more quickly in a country depends on the mixture of nationalities can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in this fact that crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of this common phenomenon and complex procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, becoming more interesting quickly in a country's population depends on the mixture of nationalities might increase the consequences of critical issues. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notions of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of the country's population becomes more interesting and develops quickly with the mixture of nationalities far outweighs its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint the thorny issues' potential implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 8.36945812808 84% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 31.9359605911 113% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1634.0 1207.87684729 135% => OK
No of words: 285.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73333333333 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31569479119 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 139.433497537 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571929824561 0.580463131201 99% => OK
syllable_count: 537.3 379.143842365 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.0997136776 50.4703680194 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.545454545 104.977214359 142% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9090909091 20.9669160288 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.36363636364 7.25397266985 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.340145149985 0.242375264174 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123759682498 0.0925447433944 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.153002499457 0.071462118173 214% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215506119324 0.151781067708 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0897247576042 0.0609392437508 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 12.6369458128 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 20.72 53.1260098522 39% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 10.9458128079 152% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.25 11.5310837438 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.31 8.32886699507 124% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 55.0591133005 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.94827586207 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.