Some people say that people are defined by the place where they grow up, but some argue that the environment only has little effect. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Use a celebrity you know to support your opinion.
Recently, the phenomenon of "some people say that people are defined by the place where they grow up, but some argue that the environment only has little effect" and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debating the proposition that the environment might be remarkably fruitful, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a remarkable number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the place can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the culture standpoint, defining people by the place where they grow up can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that the motherland and being a patriot are inextricably bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the effects of the homeland on the people's attitude. Thus, invaluable ramifications of both loving the hometown and cultural events distinctly can be observed.
Within the realm of psychology, without the slightest doubt, the little effect of the environment on people might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of the individuals' self-esteem. Moreover, fundamental aspects of the environmental effects can relate to the reality that the demerits of growing in a bad environment can pertain to the absence of an appropriate family. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of the environment were correlated positively with the place, the local authorities would ultimately address improving the happiness index. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of celebrities' opinions.
To conclude, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt to vigorously support the idea that the merits of defining people by the place far outweigh its downsides.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-08-16 | sattar_iust | 96 | view |
- The chart below shows how frequently people in the USA ate in fast food restaurants between 2003 and 2013 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- City population has been growing rapidly To cope with this problem should we rely on city planners or new policies 88
- The pie charts below show units of electricity production by fuel source in Australia and France in 1980 and 2000 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- Some people say that the best way to improve public health is by increasing the number of sports facilities Others however say that this would have little effect on public health and that other measures are required Discuss both view and give your own opi 89
- The two maps below show road access to a city hospital in 2007 and 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 214, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nd its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 376, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'peoples'' or 'people's'?
Suggestion: peoples'; people's
...ered the effects of the homeland on the peoples attitude. Thus, invaluable ramification...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, moreover, regarding, so, thus, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 6.10837438424 164% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 5.94088669951 236% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 22.0 20.9802955665 105% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 31.9359605911 125% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1661.0 1207.87684729 138% => OK
No of words: 299.0 242.827586207 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.55518394649 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19420580896 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 139.433497537 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602006688963 0.580463131201 104% => OK
syllable_count: 530.1 379.143842365 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.931034482759 322% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.5024630542 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.2769137171 50.4703680194 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.0 104.977214359 144% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1818181818 20.9669160288 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.90909090909 7.25397266985 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 6.9802955665 57% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.307052005751 0.242375264174 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0988284391987 0.0925447433944 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0994747846074 0.071462118173 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171815195859 0.151781067708 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0666854050686 0.0609392437508 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 12.6369458128 145% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 53.1260098522 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.9458128079 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.26 11.5310837438 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.73 8.32886699507 129% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.3980295567 123% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.