Recently, the phenomenon of government investment in arts, music and painting and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of such cultural investment is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that investment in art music and painting can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, Investment in arts, music, and painting can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of national identity, as well as preserving the artists, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered people involved in the art, music, and painting were more famous than the normal students. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both investing in art, music, and painting apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of finance, Investment in arts, music, and painting might increase the consequences of the financial crisis. Moreover, fundamental aspects of reducing budget could relate to this reality that the demerits of less money pertain to unnecessary expenses done by government officers. As a tangible example, some economic research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of investment in art, music, and painting is correlated negatively with lack of information. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of scarcity of the money.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of investing in art, music, and painting far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of investing in artists prove the significance of country pride, but also pinpoint financial implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 8.36945812808 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 31.9359605911 135% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.75862068966 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1634.0 1207.87684729 135% => OK
No of words: 297.0 242.827586207 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50168350168 5.00649968141 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10956204967 2.71678728327 114% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 139.433497537 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589225589226 0.580463131201 102% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 379.143842365 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 8.0 0.931034482759 859% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.1707153739 50.4703680194 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.166666667 104.977214359 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.75 20.9669160288 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186076754745 0.242375264174 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0727474118479 0.0925447433944 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0382752109868 0.071462118173 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117905304915 0.151781067708 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0240696569835 0.0609392437508 39% => 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: 16.9 12.6369458128 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 53.1260098522 73% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.92 11.5310837438 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.2 8.32886699507 122% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 55.0591133005 183% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.94827586207 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.5123152709 133% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 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.