Government should reduce investment in arts, music, and painting. Agree or disagree?
Recently, the art investment has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question "Should the government reduce investment in arts?". Whereas it is a widely held view that putting the budget in arts and music is really vital, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the cultural standpoint, the art investment issues are bound up with governmental policies, which indicates they lead to both cultural improvement and classical society. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2014 demonstrates the relationship between music and painting as well as an exponential increase in artificial arts. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far supports that the contention that the likelihood of reducing governmental investment is correlated positively with not only troubled culture but also the musical instrument.
Within the realm of society, without the slightest doubt, art worlds attribute to societal improvement, in that it would come down to shaping people' mindset, well-educated individuals, and the more artists. A salient example of such attribution is the modern society, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take the musical exhibition for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint cultural behavior problems. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal role of promoting arts in the human communities.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes "all's well that ends well," after what elaborated above, I firmly believe that the art investment by the government pays a significant role in the cultural issues. However, with the benefit of hindsight, we conceive the more we research, the further we discover.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 28, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Recently, the art invesment has sparked an ongoing controversy, whic...
^^
Line 7, column 78, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...ying goes 'alls well that ends well,' after what elaborated aboev, I firmly ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, however, if, really, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 5.75862068966 278% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1552.0 1207.87684729 128% => OK
No of words: 277.0 242.827586207 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.60288808664 5.00649968141 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16699310067 2.71678728327 117% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 139.433497537 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.660649819495 0.580463131201 114% => OK
syllable_count: 473.4 379.143842365 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 5.0 1.56157635468 320% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.65517241379 192% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 44.0518102179 50.4703680194 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.090909091 104.977214359 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1818181818 20.9669160288 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.72727272727 7.25397266985 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.144885793647 0.242375264174 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0460672093468 0.0925447433944 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0439936903681 0.071462118173 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0816943284816 0.151781067708 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0470787721902 0.0609392437508 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 53.1260098522 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.5 11.5310837438 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.86 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 55.0591133005 191% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.