In recent decades, spending the national budget on preserving minority languages has become a topic of discussion as those languages are on the verge of extinction. Although some might oppose this idea due to its seemingly insignificant benefits, this is the most appropriate use of government money.
There have been many good reasons why preserving minority languages would be a waste of money. First, since there are few people speaking endangered languages these days, preserving those languages may result in little benefit. In fact, those speaking minority languages would face many difficulties in interacting with people from different cultures, which potentially undermines the preservation. In addition, since these languages are only spoken by small communities, educational programs and facilities needed to encourage people to learn them would be prohibitively expensive. In fact, this money might be better spent on other public services, which contributes more to the society.
However, there are certain reasons why minority languages should be preserved. First, languages spoken by ethnic minority people and their cultural identity are closely related. For example, the ways in which the minorities use their languages would reflect their belief systems, values, and assumptions. In addition, if endangered languages were not preserved, the traditional values would likely be compromised, as languages are vitally important parts of a culture. Therefore, protecting those languages will ensure the existence of the intangible values and traditional customs of the minorities, thereby maintaining cultural diversity.
In conclusion, even though saving minority languages initially appears insignificant, the efforts to preserve those languages offer many advantages overall. By focus government spending on language preservation, the cultural heritage will be greatly benefited.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 584, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... them would be prohibitively expensive. In fact, this money might be better spent ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, so, therefore, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1635.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 272.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.01102941176 5.12529762239 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01988212364 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 176.041082164 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.584558823529 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.8811247883 49.4020404114 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.785714286 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4285714286 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.64285714286 7.06120827912 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255124684852 0.244688304435 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0960063922031 0.084324248473 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0399266575872 0.0667982634062 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154249943705 0.151304729494 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0489605225011 0.056905535591 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.81 50.2224549098 53% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.58 12.4159519038 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.57 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.