Some people think that cultural traditions may be destroyed when they are used as money-making attractions. Others believe it is the only way to save these traditions. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
Nowadays, Cultural tradition practices in many societies have become monetized. Some people argue that using our history for money-making purposes have a detrimental effect on our traditions because they may lose some of its originality. However, others argue that it’s the only way for introducing a new life and audience to our old form of art.
On the one hand, monetizing our heritage has several drawbacks. Perhaps the most serious consequence is that cultural traditions should be tremendously modified in order to be breathtaking for tourists. This action has a dramatic impact on the uniqueness of our heritage, and may eventually alter it even it was deeply rooted. As a result, future generations will not have an honest chance to experience their outstanding ancestral's history. It has proven that patriotism imitates primarily when people are well aware of their precious old history. Thus, harmful ramifications can be brought about when using cultural traditions to make money.
On the other hand, establishing tourist-attraction sites carry with it several benefits. Firstly, it can initiate a new life and visitors to our abandoned culture, which may otherwise be forgotten. For example, in China, tourists are willing to pay money to apart in a tea-making party. This trend has increasingly attracted many other vacationers. Having a captivating history will indeed promote the tourism industry, which in turn play a substantial role in spreading our culture worldwide. Hence, using our heritage for money-making attractions is a positive development.
Looking at both sides of the argument, It is widely adopted that the exploitation of our cultural practices for monetary purposes is beyond positive. It is hoped that these practices put into action in the foreseeable future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 227, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... into action in the foreseeable future.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, however, if, look, may, so, thus, well, for example, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 41.998997996 69% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1532.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 280.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47142857143 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11004790304 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614285714286 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 495.9 506.74238477 98% => 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: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.9817983686 49.4020404114 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 90.1176470588 106.682146367 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4705882353 20.7667163134 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.23529411765 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.244985844028 0.244688304435 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718433830386 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0629903529318 0.0667982634062 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143485367511 0.151304729494 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0499326414176 0.056905535591 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.0946893788 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 50.2224549098 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.