Although there is a lot of translation software available, learning a language could still be advantageous. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is widely thought that people could take advantage of learning a language, albeit the existence of available translation programs these days. I fervently advocate that opinion due to the unreliability of this software as well as the convenience of daily conversation.
Admittedly, translators might be unreliable sometimes. First, it is arduous for software to comprehend the context of various conversations. This can be explained by the fact that most talking between people is based on information mentioned previously, which in turn some sentences could be understood in a particular way. Hence, searching for an individual word or phrase provides unwanted meaning in some cases, and users could create embarrassing situations. Second, the majority tend to use unpaid software, which might be low-quality programs. The result is that inaccurate definitions would be provided, which causes negative impacts. Therefore, to avoid unwanted context or have the ability to detect software mistakes, learning foreign languages is necessary.
Further and even more prominently, acquiring new language knowledge helps general dwellers considerably in daily conversation. If people want to access translation software, they have to depend on a variety of complex conditions such as wi-fi, devices’ battery, etc, which are not always available every time. Thus, a lack of tech devices might put people in inconvenient situations due to the fact that they cannot communicate. Furthermore, slang and idioms might not be found in applications; this leads to obstacles in communication either. Meanwhile, people could use their language skills independently, and some jargon could be acquired in the learning process.
In conclusion, from many arguments between these sentiments, I fervently advocate that studying language brings users benefits, although high-tech translators are developed.
| 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 |
- The chart shows Australian home Internet use by reasons and age groups Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The graph below compares changes in the birth rates of China and the USA between 1920 2000 84
- In many countries more and more people choose to buy imported food rather than food produced locally Why do people buy imported food What could be done to encourage people to buy local food 73
- The maps below show the centre of a small town called Islip as it is now and plans for its development Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The maps below show the centre of a small town called Islip as it is now and plans for its development Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, hence, if, second, so, therefore, thus, well, while, in conclusion, such as, as well as, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1614.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 278.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.80575539568 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16805812903 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.629496402878 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 496.8 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.6422969705 49.4020404114 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.6 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5333333333 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.13333333333 7.06120827912 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231824113209 0.244688304435 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722071020695 0.084324248473 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531212666684 0.0667982634062 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135982728328 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0291803195277 0.056905535591 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 50.2224549098 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.42 12.4159519038 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.21 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.