Many people argue that it is more necessary for museums and art galleries to support local artworks rather than global cultures and arts. While there are some benefits to displaying local pieces of arts in museums and art galleries, I maintain that the merits of promoting local arts will be more dominant than the demerits due to its enhancement in cultural identity and creation of a competitive environment for local young talented artists.
On the one hand, the idea of showing only local artworks in museums and art galleries is unbeneficial to some extent. First and foremost, this tendency will lead to the loss of art diversity. As there are no other art forms coming from discrepant cultures except for local ones, the museums and art galleries will become extremely tedious and significantly less appealing to local visitors. Moreover, the elimination of foreign art styles in museums and art galleries can also considerably curtail the culture exchange between nations. As a result, the cultural relationships and interconnections among countries will fade step by step.
On the other hand, there are a variety of reasons why facilitating more local arts will have positive effects on the national cultural development. The first reason is that local artworks can create a sense of culture. This is because the wealth of cultures is spoken volumes by the art foundation of their countries.Therefore, allowing local pieces of art to be known more by residents will help to enhance their awareness about the beauty and affluence of their culture. Furthermore, assisting local artworks can also create a competitive setting for potential young artists. As they will be more motivated to make their contribution to the national arts and show their talents to the public through their unique art styles.
In conclusion, while some maintain that boosting the prevalence of local art rather than worldwide artworks will be at the expense of art ranges and cultural bonds globally, I contend that the benefits of a growth in cultural sense and encouraging young talents in terms of art should not be ignored as well. In my opinion, the advantages of this development overwhelm the aforementioned disadvantages.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 318, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Therefore
...y the art foundation of their countries.Therefore, allowing local pieces of art to be kno...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, while, except for, in conclusion, as a result, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1877.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 358.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24301675978 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96248112825 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483240223464 0.561755894193 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 585.9 506.74238477 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 76.8723099745 49.4020404114 156% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.071428571 106.682146367 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5714285714 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3571428571 7.06120827912 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.334322957447 0.244688304435 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130799618525 0.084324248473 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0758879115534 0.0667982634062 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227990277982 0.151304729494 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0577833174361 0.056905535591 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.0946893788 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 50.2224549098 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.3001002004 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.98 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.