QQ5 : 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. Another convincing reason is that 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 to learn 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 128, 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, however, if, second, so, while, as to, in conclusion, such as, 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: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 7.30460921844 219% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 31.0 24.0651302605 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1911.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 359.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32311977716 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35284910392 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82737900731 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 176.041082164 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.604456824513 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 599.4 506.74238477 118% => 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: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.8196129441 49.4020404114 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.4 106.682146367 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9333333333 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.53333333333 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.263782982323 0.244688304435 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0766632568502 0.084324248473 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0707064191005 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139231948417 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0573998509867 0.056905535591 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.48 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 78.4519038076 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => 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.