International sporting events have been traditionally deemed beneficial to the host country. However, some others are opposed to the idea, claiming that it does more harm than good. Whilst the former view can be justified for some reasons, I am more inclined towards the latter.
I can understand why it might be beneficial for any nation to host an international sporting event. For countries wishing to promote their profiles, the Olympics and other similar sport-related events can be an ideal choice. A lot more people know about a once-lesser-known South Africa after World Cup 2010, and China has gained increasing global reputation for its successful Olympic Beijing 2008. In addition, preparation for such international events may create jobs for locals, temporarily revitalizing depressed areas.
However, those aforementioned benefits are short-lived, and hosting such a big event is more likely to bring about long-term negative consequences to the environment and the economic wellbeing of the host country. Every aspect of construction, from producing bricks to delivery, has measurable impacts on the environment, let alone the establishment of facilities catering for the needs of a big sporting event like the Olympics, which often brings in its wake the obliteration of hundred acres of woodland. In addition, those amenities are often disused and abandoned after a short period of time, and the costs for maintenance can become a huge economic burden.
In conclusion, my firm conviction is that while hosting an international sporting event can be advantageous to a certain extent, it has profound negative effects on the environmental and economic aspects of a country. There are always better alternatives that benefit a country than organising a very big event without anticipating its long-term impacts.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 583, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ten disused and abandoned after a short period of time, and the costs for maintenance can beco...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, may, so, well, while, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 41.998997996 69% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1547.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.48581560284 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1936025313 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 176.041082164 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606382978723 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 492.3 506.74238477 97% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 60.395168589 49.4020404114 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.916666667 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.08333333333 7.06120827912 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241719108702 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0907893475774 0.084324248473 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0376263913996 0.0667982634062 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147464381627 0.151304729494 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0516502917959 0.056905535591 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.76 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.