Q1 Over the last few decades, there has been an increase in international tourism. Some people think that tourism is beneficial for local communities and should be encouraged. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the issue of tourism has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that global tourism should not be discouraged as it exerts a positive influence on local communities, while others argue otherwise. Personally, I believe that both arguments should be given equal weight. In the following essay, the evidence supporting this contention will be discussed alongside relevant examples.
On the one hand, it seems difficult to refute the idea that local communities benefit a great deal from the development of the tourism industry. Perhaps the principal advantage is that global tourism can stimulate economic growth considering that it attracts investment from multinational corporations and governments across the globe. In addition, tourism sectors create a myriad of employment opportunities in the building of facilities and the updating of infrastructure, including railways and roads, which enables local residents to land a job with greater ease. To provide a hypothetical example, if it were not for the tourism industry, there would be much higher unemployment rates in a multitude of renowned cities amongst overseas visitors, such as Paris and Venice.
On the other hand, it seems short-sighted to contend that the advancement of international tourism merely brings with it positives. The most oft-cited argument against such a view is that foreign travellers who produce an astronomical amount of waste poses a threat to the local environment. As an illustration, one notable natural heritage site designated by UNESCO in South Korea had numerous endangered species of birds. However, the majority of these species became extinct in 2015 since a great deal of garbage generated by travellers accelerated the speed of their disappearance. Furthermore, some tourists commit vandalism, placing a heavy financial burden on the local government given that vast sums of public funding is required to restore damaged amenities. In light of the above, I also find these persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of the debate has its strengths, as discussed above.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-09 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2022-08-07 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2022-03-30 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2022-03-30 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2021-09-11 | idid382002 | 89 | view |
- People think that old buildings should be knocked down and give way to modern buildings To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Q Some people think young people are not suitable for important positions in the government while other people think it is a good idea for young people to take on these positions Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- Q9 A growing number of people feel that animals should not be exploited by people and that they should have the same rights as humans while others argue that humans must employ animals to satisfy their various needs including uses for food and research Wh 84
- Q5 It is not necessary for people to travel to other places to learn about the culture We can learn as much as from books films and the Internet To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- Q3 Living in a country where you have to speak a foreign language can cause serious social problems as well as practical problems To what extent do you agree with this statement 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, however, if, so, while, in addition, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1904.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 348.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47126436782 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07081609365 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.626436781609 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 608.4 506.74238477 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.6009072498 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.0 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0625 7.06120827912 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
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: 0.202731773733 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0555705332274 0.084324248473 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0474072715682 0.0667982634062 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106741561674 0.151304729494 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0619687485081 0.056905535591 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.21 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 78.4519038076 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.