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.
the state is the major responsible of preserving cultural heritage , as one of the most valuable features of a country. The author claims that the metropolises should get the most proportion of financial supports because they are the main sources of cultural traditions in a country. Indeed, I do not completely agree with neither the claim nor the reason.
Firstly, the budget allocated to preserve the cultural heritage of a country should definitely be associated with the number of cultural elements in each area. However, the existence of such valuable cultural figures in metropolises is scarcely probable. For example, in my country, there are lots of historical constructions and places such as old buildings, ancient bridges ,and gardens, located in villages and suburbs rather than huge cities. Preserving these historical valuable places and transmitting them to the next generation needs the financial support of the state. Obviously, the financial resources of a government are limited, hence, spending too much amount of money in megacities may lead to limit the budget that should be allotted in preserving cultural figures in other areas.
Moreover, we cannot lose sight of the fact that a large proportion of cultural traditions are relevant to the lifestyle of the residents in each region. The style of living in megacities is highly affected by modern technological advancements. For instance, It is clear that the communications of city dwellers, the way that they act and talk to each other, the equipment utilized by them, even the food that they eat, all are absolutely free of traditional customs. People in major cities mostly focus on using cutting- edge devices such as smartphones and laptops to do their daily tasks. In huge cities, cooking Traditional foods is replaced by using fast foods. While in small cities and villages we can find a large number of traditional habits such as traditional lifestyles or ancient accents and foods. Protecting these valuable customs undoubtedly needs a significant amount of financial supports.
In conclusion, major cities in comparison with other areas are not more worthful in terms of the nation's cultural traditions. So under no circumstances are the states allowed to consider them exclusively as their major priority in spending financial resources to preserve the cultural heritage. In fact, financial support of traditional features do not depend on the area in which it is located.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
the state is the major responsible of prese...
^^^
Line 1, column 67, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ponsible of preserving cultural heritage , as one of the most valuable features of...
^^
Line 3, column 376, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...s such as old buildings, ancient bridges ,and gardens, located in villages and sub...
^^
Line 5, column 714, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...n small cities and villages we can find a large number of traditional habits such as traditional ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, moreover, so, well, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2077.0 2235.4752809 93% => OK
No of words: 391.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31202046036 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94805150109 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529411764706 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 704.065955056 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.1930738666 60.3974514979 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.388888889 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7222222222 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.21951772744 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.30664333596 0.243740707755 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0876894183072 0.0831039109588 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0488009795964 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188450610084 0.150359130593 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0404421104259 0.0667264976115 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.8420337079 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.