In underdeveloped countries, tourism has disadvantages and can be said the opposite as well. What is your opinion?
Recently, the phenomenon of developing tourism and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the significance of complex procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that disadvantages of tourism can be a plus and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, underdeveloped countries can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the 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. Hence, beneficial ramifications of both developing infrastructure and increasing facilities apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, improving tourism might increase the consequences of critical needs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Thus, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of developed countries.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both side, I profoundly believe that the benefits of atractive place far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint 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 : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 20.9802955665 81% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 31.9359605911 85% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1355.0 1207.87684729 112% => OK
No of words: 231.0 242.827586207 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.8658008658 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89854898053 3.92707691288 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39918095118 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 139.433497537 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.69696969697 0.580463131201 120% => OK
syllable_count: 440.1 379.143842365 116% => 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: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.4698239979 50.4703680194 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.181818182 104.977214359 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 20.9669160288 100% => 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 : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145813021568 0.242375264174 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0487361843642 0.0925447433944 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0582155864985 0.071462118173 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0719250823046 0.151781067708 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0495668217487 0.0609392437508 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 12.6369458128 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 53.1260098522 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.77 11.5310837438 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.38 8.32886699507 137% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 55.0591133005 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.94827586207 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 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.