Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect. In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do? Interrupt and correct the mistake right away. Wait until the class or meeting is over and the people are gone, and then talk to the teacher or meeting leader. Say nothing. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Development of technology has led to the creation of a world full of new facilities, opportunities and rights including the freedom of speech in which people can freely express their ideas and share their opinions. As a result, I would go to the meeting leader right after the meeting to discuss the point made in his speech and I realized it was wrong. This essay will explore the reasons for my perspective in the following paragraphs.
First of all, it is substantial to point out a speaker's mistake to make him aware of his misunderstanding of the subject. Otherwise, he may not understand his error and may repeat the same mistake over and over again in different situations some of which might be very crucial for him. However, talking about a mistake privately is definitely the right of every speaker because he may feel embarrassed and lose his confidence while being criticized publicly. For example, when I was a high school student, my chemistry teacher had difficulty pronouncing an English word. I spotted his mistake on the first day of class, but because he was a very professional teacher in his field, I could not tell him that he was wrong. Afterwards, I saw my teacher on television making the same mistake. I felt very sorry that I did not tell him about the correct pronunciation and let that awful disaster happen to him.
Secondly, addressing a mistake and discussing it would be beneficial for the error-spotter as well as the speaker to some extent. In fact, by talking about a misunderstanding with the speaker, the person would find out if he correctly got the main points of the subject. I think a personal example can shed some light on this statement. A couple of years ago, I took part in a conference about bridge engineering. During the sessions, I spotted an error in the research procedure of one of the speakers. In the break time, I went to him and asked about that specific part of the procedure to draw his attention to the mistake. While he was explaining, I found out that I was wrong about a very important rule of the research. If I had not talked about the mistake, I would have not realized my misunderstanding, even though that was not my intention.
On the whole, taking all the aforementioned reasons into account, I believe that it is more beneficial to talk about a mistake with the speaker but privately. Not only will this help him to know his mistake and correct it in a way that would not disturb his self-esteem, but it also can help the person who finds the mistake to figure out if he himself is not wrong.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, well, while, for example, i think, in fact, talking about, as a result, as well as, first of all, on the whole
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 9.8082437276 153% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 65.0 43.0788530466 151% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 52.1666666667 121% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2115.0 1977.66487455 107% => OK
No of words: 456.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.63815789474 4.8611393121 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86601581114 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 212.727598566 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478070175439 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 660.6 618.680645161 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.51630824373 92% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 9.59856630824 167% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0742011487 48.9658058833 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.75 100.406767564 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8 20.6045352989 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.4 5.45110844103 154% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 3.85842293907 337% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0983337676098 0.236089414692 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0304316120264 0.076458572812 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0341489941964 0.0737576698707 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0695122805318 0.150856017488 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0409178534045 0.0645574589148 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 11.7677419355 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 58.1214874552 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.93 10.9000537634 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.01818996416 94% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 86.8835125448 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.