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?
Recently, the issue of how to understand the culture of other places has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that people do not need to travel overseas in order to learn about the culture, 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 travelling abroad makes it possible for people to have a deeper understanding of different cultures. Perhaps the most compelling reason is that visiting a foreign nation enables travellers not only to communicate with locals in person but also to mingle with them, leading tourists to acquire real knowledge about local cultures. Furthermore, some materials, such as books and films, often present biased information considering that these include intentions of writers or producers, which hinders readers from understanding cultures precisely. For these reasons, there does seem to be a solid basis for the claim that first-hand experience is much more beneficial for learning about cultures than second-hand experience.
On the other hand, it seems short-sighted to contend that paying a visit to an overseas country is the sole way of having a tight grasp of foreign cultures. The most oft-cited argument against such a view is that developments in technology have revolutionised the way people can gain a huge amount of information about other cultures regardless of time and place with greater ease and even can reap knowledge about areas that they cannot visit. As an illustration, one cultural heritage site that has numerous endangered species of birds in South Korea prevented people from travelling to that area in 2015 because a multitude of visitors took a heavy toll on the environment. However, people can obtain information about that place by using various methods, including the Internet. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-23 | kevann | 73 | view |
| 2022-08-08 | idid382021 | 78 | view |
| 2022-08-06 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2022-08-03 | hellielts | 89 | view |
| 2022-02-09 | camille1104 | 80 | view |
- Q3 Human activities have negative effects on plants and animal species Some people think that it is too late to do anything about this problem Other people believe that effective measures can be taken to improve this situation Discuss both views and give 89
- X
- Q16 Research says more and more business training and business meeting are taking place online Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 84
- Q9 With the increasing demand for energy sources of oil and gas people should look for sources of oil and gas in remote and untouched natural places Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of damaging such areas 89
- Q10 Development in technology causes environmental problems Some people believe the solution in these problems is everyone accepts a simpler way of life while others say that technology can solve these problems Discuss both views and give your own opinion 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, but, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, while, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 41.998997996 140% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1918.0 1615.20841683 119% => OK
No of words: 365.0 315.596192385 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25479452055 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86261909845 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.6 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 604.8 506.74238477 119% => 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: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.2223221837 49.4020404114 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.866666667 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.93333333333 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.269790161065 0.244688304435 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0775114284818 0.084324248473 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0693048639672 0.0667982634062 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142285609628 0.151304729494 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0592571925772 0.056905535591 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.41 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.