Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.
Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
It is argued that, in order to perpetuate the traditional culture that normally resides in big cities, the state should financially support those cities and keep them in a prosperous state. I disagree with the claim and the assumption upon which it based. Firstly, traditional culture does not only exist in big cities, the rural area are also embedded with abundant ancient legacies. Secondly, to provide financial support does not necessarily lead to efficient and successful cultural preservation, it can sometimes harm it instead. Undoubtedly, cultural traditions needs to be protected, but the identification of needs as well as the approaches we use deserve careful examination.
To begin with, the reason provided is not valid because when it comes to the presence of cultural traditions, the economically developed cities do not always outperform the remoted area. In Brazil, for example, the indigenous tribes, who still embrace a lifestyle that can be dated back to hundreds years ago, are majoritively living in the Amazon jungle. Therefore, it is in the very remote area where tradition keeps its energy. In some cases, it is even the highly developed economy itself that are detrimental to traditions and threaten its perseverance. People who move to the city are likely to be assimilated into the universal modern culture and easily forget the distinguished traditional cultural in which they grew up. Therefore, big cities are not the only place, and sometimes less desirable place, to seek for and sustain our cultural legacy, the less developed or less known area, can be where the true spiritual treasures truely stay.
In addition to the geographical identification of cultural tradition, the approaches the state take are also critical. It is important to bear in mind that, offering financial support does not necessarily sustain cultural in the long-term period, it can even do more harm than good. For instance, in China, the areas where ethnic minorities have lived for hundreds of years, are financially assisted by the local government in order to preserve their culture. However, the supports from government are proved to be ineffective as the local ethnic residents prefer to spend money buying modern products such as TV and refrigerators instead of sustain their culture. Money can do many things, but it fails to provide incentives for a culture to thrive. Therefore, whether providing merely financial supports can be effective in preserving traditions remains highly questionable.
Admittedly, for cultural institutions like museums and research institutions dedicated to cultural studies and protections, government should underwrite these institutions as it is hard for them to make a profit if to preserve the authenticity of traditional cultures is their primary goal. Likewise, for ethnographies who spend their life studying and documenting the traditional customs and beliefs, financial support from the government can be very helpful.
In conclusion, we should not only pay attention to big cities when it comes to cultural protections and development. Sometimes the most valuable cultural assets may reside in the most unexpected area. To spend limited resources in the right way and to the right place requires careful examinations of the situations and professional knowledge and skills in terms of how to let cultures thrive.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 17, column 395, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in terms of how to let cultures thrive.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, likewise, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, well, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as well as, in some cases, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2867.0 2235.4752809 128% => OK
No of words: 528.0 442.535393258 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42992424242 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79356345386 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02459690034 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503787878788 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 916.2 704.065955056 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.9465714075 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.318181818 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 23.4991977007 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.59090909091 5.21951772744 184% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252520775505 0.243740707755 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0747211101871 0.0831039109588 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0419066365743 0.0758088955206 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144105924021 0.150359130593 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371747541337 0.0667264976115 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.1392134831 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 100.480337079 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.