Watching a live performance such as a play, concert, or sporting event is more enjoyable than watching the same event on television. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
It is argued that attending performances in person offers a more engaging experience compared to watching the same television broadcasts. I strongly agree with this notion because it would be beneficial for audiences to experience the lively atmosphere and improve their networking by joining in live events.
One of the key advantages of watching live performances is the immersive and emotional experience it provides. In particular, participants can fully immerse themselves in the vibrant atmosphere and profound emotions of the event in a more visceral and authentic way. For example, attending the football match between Vietnamese and Uzbekistan in the AFC U23 championship provides fans with a sense of excitement and pain through the roar of the crowd when witnessing the final result. Therefore, people can derive more memorable experiences from attending live performances than watching a televised broadcast.
In addition to the captivating experience, live performances provide valuable opportunities for social connection and community building. This can be attributed to the shared emotions and reactions during the performance, leading to a shared understanding among the audience members. Moreover, live performances provide opportunities for conversation and interaction related to the shows, allowing audiences to exchange ideas and expand their relationships. To be more specific, since music concerts often attract a diverse range of individuals who come together to support their favorite artists, they can easily find like-minded people and strike up a friendship with them.
In conclusion, it seems to me that attending live shows is of greater pleasure because they provide a more thrilling atmosphere and personal interactions with other audiences. It is advisable that all fans of celebrities should consider buying tickets and going to live events if they have capabilities.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-10 | dinhngocquynh2003 | 78 | view |
| 2023-05-29 | Pham Van Nhan | 89 | view |
| 2023-03-13 | trinhthanh1 | 67 | view |
| 2023-03-13 | trinhthanh1 | 67 | view |
| 2023-03-13 | trinhthanh1 | 67 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in particular
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1629.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 283.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.75618374558 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2252407007 2.80592935109 115% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 176.041082164 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.593639575972 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 513.9 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 32.9502992736 49.4020404114 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.75 106.682146367 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5833333333 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.83333333333 7.06120827912 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => 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: 0.243965879612 0.244688304435 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0910871120522 0.084324248473 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0588419148713 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149737533576 0.151304729494 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0547612382855 0.056905535591 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 13.0946893788 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.42 12.4159519038 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.97 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.