How learning more than one language affect the working conditions?
Recently, the phenomenon of learning foreign languages and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of bilingual students is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded both constructive and positive by a number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that native speakers can be a plus, and I analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, importance of second language can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of speaking as well as learning are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered language disorder. Thus beneficial ramifications of work conditions and bilingual workers are apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, impacts of foreign languages on working environment might increase the consequences of employers’ satisfaction. Moreover, fundamental impacts of skilled workers could relate to the reality that the demerits of language words pertain to grammars. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of tremendous advantages is correlated negatively with language tutors.
To conclude, although there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the effects of bilingualism far outweigh its drawback. Not only do the advantages of studying another language prove the significance of monolingual students, but also pinpoint various types of languages implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 346, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ent which discovered language disorder. Thus beneficial ramifications of work condit...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, if, moreover, second, so, thus, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 20.9802955665 76% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 31.9359605911 103% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1393.0 1207.87684729 115% => OK
No of words: 240.0 242.827586207 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.80416666667 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93597934253 3.92707691288 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27966959295 2.71678728327 121% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 139.433497537 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.65 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 379.143842365 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.329806976 50.4703680194 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.636363636 104.977214359 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8181818182 20.9669160288 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.45454545455 7.25397266985 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162335640793 0.242375264174 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0567348609673 0.0925447433944 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0420945735863 0.071462118173 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0890923030559 0.151781067708 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0305470163444 0.0609392437508 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 12.6369458128 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.36 11.5310837438 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.06 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 55.0591133005 176% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.94827586207 111% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.