Nowadays, there is a huge increase in tourism in developing nations, which attracted numerous controversies and drawn the attention of the public. It can be said that tourism is good for the poor nations, while on the other hand stands a perspective that it can destroy the traditional values of the country. This essay will further elaborate on both advantages and disadvantages and thus will lead to a logical conclusion.
At the outset, there are innumerable benefits of tourism to the less developed nations but the most conspicuous one stems from the fact that it can help to improve the economic condition of any country. Moreover, Tourism industry can open more hotels and restaurants for tourists and can generate more money from them by providing them the quality of service. For instance, according to the report published in The Tourism showed that the countries like as America, Germany, and Australia are making the nation's economic profile strong with the help of tourism industry. Therefore, it is beneficial for the country to make the economic condition strong.
Notwithstanding, some people hold an opposing view and tend to believe that welcoming the foreign people can affect the tradition and cultural values of the country. This is because the custom and way of talking of abroad people influence the native people of the developing nation. As an illustration, sixty percent of Indian are adopting the English language due to the huge incline of tourists in India. Needless to say that tourism can be a great threat to the nation's language.
In the view of arguments outlined above, one can conclude that despite having some drawbacks the role of tourism in improving the economy is instrumental indeed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 466, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'nations'' or 'nation's'?
Suggestion: nations'; nation's
...at tourism can be a great threat to the nations language. In the view of arguments ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, moreover, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, talking of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 6.10837438424 164% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 8.36945812808 119% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 20.9802955665 71% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 31.9359605911 122% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1452.0 1207.87684729 120% => OK
No of words: 283.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13074204947 5.00649968141 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79625665943 2.71678728327 103% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 139.433497537 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547703180212 0.580463131201 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 455.4 379.143842365 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 0.0 1.56157635468 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.4072153898 50.4703680194 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.0 104.977214359 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5833333333 20.9669160288 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.16666666667 7.25397266985 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => 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: 0.165432065914 0.242375264174 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0601725740523 0.0925447433944 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0555729039394 0.071462118173 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0971345163348 0.151781067708 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0338566065035 0.0609392437508 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 12.6369458128 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.1260098522 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.9458128079 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 11.5310837438 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.32886699507 111% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 55.0591133005 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 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.