Q5: It is not necessary for people to travel to other places to learn about the culture. We can learn as much as from books, films, and the Internet. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the question of how to understand the culture of other places has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that people do not need to travel abroad so as to understand other cultures, while others argue otherwise. Personally, I believe that both arguments should be given equal weight. In the following essay, the evidence supporting this contention will be discussed alongside relevant examples.
On the one hand, it seems difficult to refute the idea that taking trips to foreign countries enables people to have a deeper understanding of different cultures. Perhaps the most compelling reason is that visiting overseas nations makes it possible for travellers not only to communicate with locals in person but also to mingle with them, acquiring vivid knowledge about local cultures. In addition, some materials, including books and movies, often present biased information as they include the intentions of writers or producers, which prevents readers from understanding cultures precisely. For these reasons, there does seem to be a solid basis for the claim that firsthand experience is much more beneficial for learning about cultures than secondhand experience.
On the other hand, it seems short-sighted to contend that travelling overseas is the sole way to have a tight grasp of foreign cultures. The most oft-cited argument against such a view is that the development of technology has revolutionised the way people reap a huge amount of information regardless of time and place with greater ease. Moreover, people can even obtain cultural knowledge about the place that they cannot visit in this technologically advanced era. As an illustration, a cultural heritage site designated by UNESCO in South Korea that has numerous endangered species of birds hindered tourists from entering the natural habitat in 2015. However, people are able to find information about the site by using various methods, including the Internet. In light of the above, I also find these persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of the debate has its strengths, as discussed above.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 174, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...hat people do not need to travel abroad so as to understand other cultures, while others...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, while, as to, in addition, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1904.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 356.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34831460674 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88874416016 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 176.041082164 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609550561798 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 602.1 506.74238477 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5926949242 49.4020404114 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.0 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.25 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => 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: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241775048724 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0647844284985 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0553561653884 0.0667982634062 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123617753041 0.151304729494 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0497731556367 0.056905535591 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.0946893788 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.7 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 78.4519038076 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.