Some people think that it is better for children to learn a foreign language at primary school. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, learning the second language for children has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question, “is it advantageous or not?” Whereas it is a widely held view that foreign language is highly beneficial, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the sociological standpoint, language ability developments are bound up inextricably with training policies, which indicates they lead to both another language and native language. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2014 demonstrates the relationship between childhood and the Multilanguage crisis as well as an exponential increase in professional achievements. Their academic criticism was impressive. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus for support the contention that the acquiring a new language for children is correlated positively with not only irreversible changes but also adverse outcomes.
Within the realm of educational science, without the slightest doubt, efficient training systems attribute to alternative hypotheses, in that it would come down to educational interventions, school curriculum implications, and foreign language institutions. A salient example of such attribution is non-governmental organizations, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take speaking skill improvements for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint learning process problems. Likewise, hardly had they confine their attention to other languages like Germany, French, and even Persian. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal rule of systematic changes.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes “all’s well that ends well,” after analyzing what elaborated above, I highly agree that learning another language in primary school is of high importance. However, we perceive that with the benefit of hindsight, the more we research, the further we discover.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 84, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...oes 'all's well that ends well,' after analyzing what elaborated above,...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, however, if, likewise, second, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 20.9802955665 114% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1751.0 1207.87684729 145% => OK
No of words: 293.0 242.827586207 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97610921502 5.00649968141 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.37842587187 2.71678728327 124% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 139.433497537 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.682593856655 0.580463131201 118% => OK
syllable_count: 539.1 379.143842365 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.993945634 50.4703680194 155% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.916666667 104.977214359 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4166666667 20.9669160288 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.83333333333 7.25397266985 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 6.9802955665 143% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194802647807 0.242375264174 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0540876896584 0.0925447433944 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0533050233031 0.071462118173 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111776821537 0.151781067708 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0209341818968 0.0609392437508 34% => 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: 18.9 12.6369458128 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 53.1260098522 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.7 11.5310837438 153% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.97 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 55.0591133005 207% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 22.0 9.94827586207 221% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => 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.