Think critically about the following statement.
A universal language should replace all languages.
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of a universal language
Communication via language is a unique feature of human beings which has developed over millions of years. We understand each other by the help of words. The colorful variety of many languages talked by different nations is astonishing.However,a universal language can connect all the speakers of different languages around the world together. Although it may have some advantages, I believe that eradicating the existing languages in favor of a universal one will turn our colorful realm of speaking to a monochromatic one. In the other words, it will ruin the rich cultural diversity of the human world.
Having only one universal language will provides people on the world with a clear understanding of each other. Communication will become drastically easy. Business will boom and language barrier won't be any obstacle on the way of networking. Science will be readily accessible for any population. Globalization will accelerate and the term "global village" will come to its fully developed presentation.
However, the history of any nation is the cement that keeps the integrity of its people. No matter whether it is oral or written, it forms the collective memory of a society. Forcing people to abandon their mother tongue is equal to cutting the bonds of nations to their collective memory. After a few generations, it might only be the expert linguists who can understand their history.
Moreover, multifarious languages originated in different parts of the world are developed and flourished in their particular nature in response to ecological as well as geopolitical differences of each particular area. Therefore, any language has its unique cultural elements that describe its speakers. Replacing it with a universal language, lead to disruption of the national identity.
In conclusion, despite the benefits of replacing many languages that cannot mutually understand each other with a single globally understandable one, such action will definitely damage the cultural richness of human beings and will ruin the historical heritage of our ancestors. Thus, I believe that reducing the variety of currently spoken languages to one universally comprehendible is not wise at all.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The private car has brought more harm than benefits to the planet Use reasons and specific examples to support your opinion 85
- Some people think that human needs for farmland,housing and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals.Do you agree or disagree with this point of view?Why why not? 83
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? You should not believe everything you read in the newspaper. 80
- Integrated-twins 90
- Integrated essay- self awareness among animals 90
Comments
Thanks for the tips. I
Thanks for the tips.
I re-write the essay.
Would you please rate it for a second time?
You don't just remove 'which
You don't just remove 'which distinguish each specific speaker from the others.'. You didn't use 'which' properly. Can you re-write this sentence:
The colorful variety of many languages talked by different nations is astonishing, which distinguish each specific speaker from the others.
Communication via language is
Communication via language is a unique feature of human beings which has developed over millions of years. We understand each other by the help of words. The colorful variety of many languages talked by different nations is astonishing.However,a universal language can connect all the speakers of different languages around the world together. Although it may have some advantages, I believe that eradicating the existing languages in favor of a universal one will turn our colorful realm of speaking to a monochromatic one. In the other words, it will ruin the rich cultural diversity of the human world.
Having only one universal language will provides people on the world with a clear understanding of each other. Communication will become drastically easy. Business will boom and language barrier won't be any obstacle on the way of networking. Science will be readily accessible for any population. Globalization will accelerate and the term "global village" will come to its fully developed presentation.
However, the history of any nation is the cement that keeps the integrity of its people. No matter whether it is oral or written, it forms the collective memory of a society. Forcing people to abandon their mother tongue is equal to cutting the bonds of nations to their collective memory. After a few generations, it might only be the expert linguists who can understand their history.
Moreover, multifarious languages originated in different parts of the world are developed and flourished in their particular nature in response to ecological as well as geopolitical differences of each particular area. Therefore, any language has its unique cultural elements that describe its speakers. Replacing it with a universal language, lead to disruption of the national identity.
In conclusion, despite the benefits of replacing many languages that cannot mutually understand each other with a single globally understandable one, such action will definitely damage the cultural richness of human beings and will ruin the historical heritage of our ancestors. Thus, I believe that reducing the variety of currently spoken languages to one universally comprehendible is not wise at all.
It is OK now. But you need to
It is OK now. But you need to know well how to use 'which'.
The colorful variety of many languages talked by different nations is astonishing, which distinguish each specific speaker from the others.
Description: 'which' refers to what? can you re-write this sentence?
will provides every each person on the world with a clear understanding of the others.
will provide every person on the world a clear understanding of others.
Replacing it with a universal language, lead to disruption of the people singular identity.
Replacing it with a universal language will lead a disruption of identity.
Sentence: However, I believe that eradicating the existing languages in favor of a universal one will turn our colorful realm of speaking to a sapid monochromatic one.
Error: sapid Suggestion: ?
Sentence: Thus, I believe that reducing the variety of currently spoken languages to one universally comprehendible is not wise at all.
Error: comprehendible Suggestion: comprehensible
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 24 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 351 350
No. of Characters: 1855 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.328 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.285 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.969 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 145 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 92 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.55 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.8 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.3 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.278 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.051 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5