Globalization” refers to growing economic and cultural interconnectedness between different regions of the world. Because modern transportation and electronic communication has made commercial relationships between distant people easier than ever before, the world is rapidly becoming a single interactive zone. This phenomenon has brought several unanticipated benefits.
The most commonly cited virtue of globalization is that it allows developing nations to use their low costs of living to their advantage. Because workers in developing nations can survive on less money, the production of goods in the developing world is significantly cheaper. This encourages business with those economies, fostering economic wellbeing. Southeast Asia, for example, has seen annual economic growth, allowing its citizens to live more comfortably today than their parents did only a generation ago.
A secondary but no less noteworthy advantage is that world trade creates competition that would otherwise be missing. As the rise of capitalism has demonstrated, competition forces the producers of goods to keep their goods’ quality as high or higher than that of their competitors and, simultaneously, their costs as affordable as possible. This means, in general, better goods for lower prices among those countries that participate in the global system. Those that do not, meanwhile, see prices climb.
Finally, globalization has cultivated a mutual reliance between countries that puts pressure on governments to make safer and healthier choices. Countries that rely on one another’s business are far less likely to go to war, for instance, and also must listen to the environmental concerns of their business partners. Countries that pollute excessively will see less business, and therefore must learn to curb environmental damage.
The merits of globalization are debatable, as the professor illustrates in a number of points which refute the support offered by the text. Whereas the reading passage states that globalization is generally a positive development, the professor believes that it has done harm in a number of ways.
The first point that the lecturer brings up is related to the large recession many countries have seen since 2008. He links that crash to economic interdependence. If countries did not rely on each other so much, they would not be as deeply affected by the financial downturns of the countries they do business with. This contrasts with the text, which states that the global market creates better competition. The author of that text essentially argues that the more global business countries do, the healthier their economies will be.
Next, the professor brings up the movement of jobs between countries. Although the passage puts this in a positive light, stating that jobs moving to new countries means those countries will have more work opportunities, the professor believes that there is a negative side. Specifically, he says that jobs also leave countries, as in the example of TV factories which closed in the US after trade opened with Mexico. Those workers lost their jobs because production was moved to another country.
And finally, the professor refutes the idea that globalization can help the environment. He points out that cheap production is often the same type of manufacturing that causes air pollution. There is an economic incentive for countries that do business abroad to continue working cheaply, and by doing so, to continue polluting. This is a clear contrast to the text, which suggests that polluting countries will be pressured by their business partners to clean up any environmentally harmful practices.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 155, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'countries'' or 'country's'?
Suggestion: countries'; country's
... light, stating that jobs moving to new countries means those countries will have more wo...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, if, so, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1550.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 297.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21885521886 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89986768974 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 145.348785872 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572390572391 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 465.3 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.8079512949 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.333333333 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.46666666667 7.06452816374 35% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0487875653952 0.272083759551 18% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0210751569473 0.0996497079465 21% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0205924332737 0.0662205650399 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0310968991298 0.162205337803 19% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00412346230935 0.0443174109184 9% => 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: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.