Some people think that we should invent a new language for international communication. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
It has been proposed that communication on a global scale necessitates the advent of a novel language. While its benefits are discernible, it seems to me that this approach offers more drawbacks.
On the one hand, the proponents of a new language justify that it can facilitate universal understanding among linguistic communities. In particular, while there have been significant distinctions between languages in how their native speakers express a certain idea, a shared lingual system obviously can eradicate such differences. As a result, language barriers may be lifted, and conflicts are expected to vanish, since the same language can reduce misunderstanding and build up sympathy. However, over the past century, among scores of languages, several ones have emerged as indispensable for global communication, in which human beings are adept to assure a smooth linguistic exchange. Therefore, any effort to create a new language may be redundant.
On the other hand, I opine that the appearance of a new language will be problematic because of several reasons. To begin with, many people advocate that a harmonised linguistic system can simplify verbal factors involved in expressions; on the contrary, it is observed that it tends to obfuscate how we communicate, just as people use a long sentence to say “hello” in Esperanto. In other words, the acquisition of an International language may exert an immense pressure on learners, the majority of whom are inherently struggling in learning English or French. In addition, languages, which reflect cultural nuances, should be viewed as cultural heritage. Therefore, their oblivion, along with cultural homogenisation is foreseen if a shared language is applied on a global scale.
In conclusion, although language harmonisation is advantageous in international communication, I hold an opinion that its hurdles are more considerable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... this approach offers more drawbacks. On the one hand, the proponents of a new...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eate a new language may be redundant. On the other hand, I opine that the appe...
^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...anguage is applied on a global scale. In conclusion, although language harmoni...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 154, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...that its hurdles are more considerable.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, may, so, therefore, while, in addition, in conclusion, in particular, as a result, in other words, on the contrary, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1618.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 290.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.57931034483 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34984337753 2.80592935109 119% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610344827586 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 523.8 506.74238477 103% => 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: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 13.0 4.76152304609 273% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.4798969492 49.4020404114 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.461538462 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3076923077 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.3846153846 7.06120827912 175% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181962522226 0.244688304435 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0586241249846 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0255893400445 0.0667982634062 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0998343889932 0.151304729494 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0251745081552 0.056905535591 44% => 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: 16.0 13.0946893788 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.38 12.4159519038 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.44 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.