It is believed that reading books has more effective on vision and language skills than watching TV. I partially agree with this view, as know will be discuss.
On the one hand reading books can be seen as beneficial for developing brain and learning language. Firstly, reading builds your vocabulary because you have more opportunities to exposure to language and can discover a love of language when reading. For instance, reading your favorite novels or stories in a new language more motivate you to continue when you can comprehend the contents of them. Secondly, thank to reading your imagination can prove. When reading the mind have to make effort to comprehend all that you are reading; then, you analyze the deeper meaning and make judgment based on the theories portrayed in the text. For example, when the story illustrates a monster, you will imagine its colour, shape in your mind.
On the other hand, watching television is also good for developing brain and language. While a lot of people think that watching is not good for imagination and learning language because they might focus on entertaining more; however they should realize that there are many interesting channels to open mind and learn languages like BBC learning English. Furthermore, it is true that watching TV is not only advantageous for learning other languages. You have to use your eyes and ears to watch and listen to the sound of the word and the use in spoken context with vivid images to illustrate the exact meaning; therefore, people can improve better listening and speaking skills. For example, a lot of polyglots watch films, news to enhance their language when they are driving, having a breakfast or doing household chores.
In conclusion, I partly agree with the idea of ingenuity and language skill can be improve more by reading books than watching TV.
Votes
Essay reference notes: This topic is refereed from another essay topic, developed by user: lyly2017
Essay Categories
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 779, Rule ID: HAVE_A_BREAKFAST[1]
Message: When we speak of types of meals, the article is not required: 'having breakfast'.
Suggestion: having breakfast
...e their language when they are driving, having a breakfast or doing household chores. In conclus...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, however, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, it is true, 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: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1551.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 310.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00322580645 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61061030417 2.80592935109 93% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.535483870968 0.561755894193 95% => OK
syllable_count: 472.5 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.0050585863 49.4020404114 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.785714286 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1428571429 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5 7.06120827912 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.295675850839 0.244688304435 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118724533349 0.084324248473 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0869331492956 0.0667982634062 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.217855219424 0.151304729494 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0584268785693 0.056905535591 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.0946893788 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 50.2224549098 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.58950901804 93% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 78.4519038076 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.