Although there is a lot of translation software available, learning a language could still be advantageous. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
With the prosperity of cutting-edge technology, people today have been experiencing a variety of utilizations in every aspect of their life, particularly translation software. In fact, thanks to advanced modern technology, humans can communicate with each other regardless of language barriers through translation apps. Nonetheless, I contend with this notion that learning a language is still an effective method instead of heavily relying on interpretation systems. This essay will shed light on more details behind this opinion.
One major ground behind the rising of the viewpoint is that becoming influential in a language definitely helps people communicate confidently no matter the circumstances. This is because if employees can speak bilingual languages, they would comfortably have small talks with their colleagues as well as directly express their ideas to their seniors without excessively depending on translation systems. In addition, interpretation machines are making serious mistakes related to meaning reports. Unless workers have in-depth knowledge of the language, this may lead to severe consequences in terms of financial issues.
In the case of traveling, a tourist proficient in French tends to be more actively interacting with local residents during the trip to France, making a contribution to do away with language barriers. Therefore, this obviously forges a stronger bond between the two nations.
Another reason lies in playing an indispensable role in the purpose of holistic development. Learning a language is a magical means of broadening citizens’ horizons, and gaining more profound insights into diverse cultures. As competent in any language, they have the ability to explore and discover well-rounded prospects in local traditional customs by brooding academic literature documents. For instance, a Vietnamese student who is proficient in Hindi, one of the official languages in India, would know that head shaking does not mean no, and the gesture for yes looks like a no in other cultures. As a result, they are more likely to avoid both embarrassing misunderstandings and cultural shock, which allows them to adapt better to a new environment.
In conclusion, although it cannot deny the conveniences that translation systems facilitate for human life, I still believe that this means of communication absolutely replaces the significant benefits of learning a new language. As it fosters a process of integrating cultural exchange and improves speakers’ communication in certain situations. Therefore, people should maintain learning a new language as a substitution for relying on translation machines.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-09 | hieu13092006 | 89 | view |
| 2023-03-06 | tieuquynh | 89 | view |
| 2022-11-05 | nvtrung309 | 73 | view |
| 2022-09-26 | Charles Le | 89 | view |
| 2022-07-28 | Hanhcass | 89 | view |
- Topic The charts below show the performance of a bus company in terms of punctuality both actual and target what actually happened compared to what the company was trying to achieve and the number of complaints from passengers Summarise the information by 67
- Topic Some people argue that we should do research into our family history Others agree with the view that we should focus on the present and future generations 70
- Topic The graph below shows the proportion of types of magazines sold by the company in 1975 1995 and 2015 84
- It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct e g dinosaurs dodos There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening Do you agree or disagree 84
- Topic New technologies have changed the way children spend their free time Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 89
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, look, may, nonetheless, so, still, therefore, well, as to, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 41.998997996 148% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2270.0 1615.20841683 141% => OK
No of words: 396.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73232323232 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46091344257 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2490923913 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 176.041082164 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611111111111 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 701.1 506.74238477 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.3373371749 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.111111111 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.88888888889 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => 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: 0.124996190791 0.244688304435 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.036163921339 0.084324248473 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0420407543287 0.0667982634062 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0714319667637 0.151304729494 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0373261059776 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.95 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.31 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 78.4519038076 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, look, may, nonetheless, so, still, therefore, well, as to, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 41.998997996 148% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2270.0 1615.20841683 141% => OK
No of words: 396.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73232323232 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46091344257 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2490923913 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 176.041082164 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611111111111 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 701.1 506.74238477 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.3373371749 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.111111111 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.88888888889 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => 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: 0.124996190791 0.244688304435 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.036163921339 0.084324248473 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0420407543287 0.0667982634062 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0714319667637 0.151304729494 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0373261059776 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.95 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.31 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 78.4519038076 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.