Some people argue that holding sporting events is beneficial to countries’ development. However,
other people hold the opposite opinion. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Many hold a belief that holding sports occasions does a great job in boosting the development of countries; while opponents argue that it could bring about many serious problems. To the best of my knowledge, the former point of view is more reasonable for the following reasons.
Firstly, it is note-worthy that sporting events contribute significantly to the local tourism industry. Nowadays, many studies have shown that the successful organization of sports events, typically on a global scale, is accompanied by the increasing number of foreign tourists. Therefore, it will be a grave mistake to overlook the fact that by being the host, a country is able to attract a large array of athletes and their supporters from all around the world. For example, the Olympic Games and World Cup promoted development of domestic industries like accommodation, transport or entertainment to satisfy the requirements of more visitors. This example is the illustration of the fact that holding sports festivals has chronic effects on host countries’ development.
Secondly, the counter-argument raised by objectors to this is that holding sporting events needs many budgets from governments; otherwise, local governments and authorities that on the tight budget have to spend on various social aspects, typically medication or education. This argument could be true to some extent; however, it is incomplete. What they fail to take into account is the fact that despite high expenses of organizing sports occasions, sports events are regarded as one of the top priority to governments as preserving traditional culture. For instance, Brazil’s football is the most popular sport around the world, which is a prominent part of national identity. As a result, sporting events should be protected to develop countries’ culture.
In conclusion, holding sports festivals plays an instrument in countries’ development towards tourism industries and traditional culture in a long run as mentioned above.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-19 | maiphuong0610 | 84 | view |
| 2021-07-19 | maiphuong0610 | 78 | view |
| 2021-07-19 | maiphuong0610 | 61 | view |
| 2021-07-19 | maiphuong0610 | 61 | view |
| 2021-07-19 | maiphuong0610 | 89 | view |
- The chart clearly depicts a 7 step process for producing olive oil This sequence of production starts from handpicking and eventually ends in sale or storage 84
- The graph shows the percentage of households with different kinds of technology in the UK from 1997 to 2001 89
- A bar chart shows the percentage of men and women in Great Britain who had driving licenses and another bar chart shows the percentage of men and women who applied for driving licenses at the age of 17 20 83
- The graph below shows the percentage of people going to cinemas in one European country on different days 78
- Today food travels from thousands of miles from the farm to the consumer Some people say that it would be better for the economy environment if people ate food produced from local farmers Why is this the case Is it a positive development 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hold seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many holds'.
Suggestion: Many holds
Many hold a belief that holding sports occasions ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1693.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 307.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.51465798046 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14404980531 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.596091205212 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 507.6 506.74238477 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.313308798 49.4020404114 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.230769231 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6153846154 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.2307692308 7.06120827912 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198766154217 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0703716858443 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492919214627 0.0667982634062 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126934370666 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0168029698994 0.056905535591 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => 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: 14.97 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.02 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.