In recent years, there has been a growing tendency for tourists to travel to remote locations and communities on organised tours. This has some positive impacts on the local people, but I think the detrimental effects on the environment are more significant and that the issue is more of a negative development.
The financial and socio-cultural benefits for the locals in remote areas are evident. Tourists visiting these regions have a high demand for goods and services, and are mostly willing to pay higher than average prices. This helps to boost local economies in remote areas and eventually enhance living standards of the local people. Regarding the socio-cultural aspects, Travelers from different cultures can provide ethnic people in remote areas, who are almost completely isolated from the outside world, with a lot of experiences through their interactions with one another, which can help these local residents to broaden knowledge about a more civilized society.
However, the hordes of tourists to remote regions still leave severe impacts on the environment in these areas. In fact, tourists often litter where ever they go and do not bother to clean after themselves in areas they have visited. This may lead to such conditions as dirty roads or clogged sewage systems in these places, which negatively and directly affects local people’s living conditions. In terms of indirect effects, I believe that the indigenous people have to sacrifice their natural resources to accommodate tourists’ insatiable demands. In several mountainous areas of Vietnam, local people cut down vast areas of forest to make handicrafts or furniture for tourists. These acts can contribute to the environmental deterioration in remote areas.
In conclusion, though the economy and societies in remote areas can benefit tremendously from organised tourism, I think that the negative environmental consequences that this situation brings are far more significant.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, regarding, so, still, i think, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1670.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 304.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49342105263 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91285448665 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.592105263158 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 533.7 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.5617909608 49.4020404114 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.461538462 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3846153846 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.84615384615 7.06120827912 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.282852465118 0.244688304435 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103239293296 0.084324248473 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0601246443561 0.0667982634062 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167869206441 0.151304729494 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0437714487554 0.056905535591 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.87 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 78.4519038076 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.