QQ7 : Countries with a long average working time are more economically successful than those countries which do not have a long working time. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the impact of average working time on the economy has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that longer working hours can stimulate the growth of economies in nations, 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 countries where citizens devote long hours to their work are more likely to boost economic success. Perhaps the most convincing reason is that there are some nations, experiencing economic success, which were less developed countries in the past. To exemplify, one recent article released by Seoul Times illustrates that the economy of South Korea has flourished remarkably for the last four decades considering that the figures for the gross domestic product in Korea have soared more than twenty times. In fact, it turns out that the main reason for this phenomenon is the longest working hours in Korea amongst other nations in the group of OECD countries.
On the other hand, it seems short-sighted to contend that the idea that having long working hours is the sole reason for economic growth. The most oft-cited argument against such a view is that although a multitude of nations, such as Australia and New Zealand, have never forced their citizens to spend a huge amount of time working, they are still wealthy. This is because they earn an astronomical amount of money by selling numerous natural resources in the global market with greater ease. Thus, they have never had the same urgent need for long working hours in order to increase their income unlike a number of emerging countries suffering from a lack of invaluable raw materials. 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, however, if, so, still, thus, while, in conclusion, in fact, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 10.4138276553 10% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 24.0651302605 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1778.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 348.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1091954023 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53937807531 2.80592935109 91% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 176.041082164 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594827586207 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.5642041275 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.533333333 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06120827912 88% => 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: 0.235381433965 0.244688304435 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0680695362491 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0688105339442 0.0667982634062 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118227172988 0.151304729494 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0818368929067 0.056905535591 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.