It has recently been suggested that the classical, or "dead", languages Latin and Greek should be re- introduced into the school curriculum. Those that oppose the idea claim that the ancient languages are of no practical use and no help in getting a job. Those in favor of the idea say that education is more about training the mind than preparing for a career.
Which of these points of view do you most agree with? Support your argument, where possible, with reasons and/or examples from your own experience and observations.
Recently, the phenomenon of preparing for a career and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the significance of complex procedures is gighly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial of number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that training for jobs can be a plus and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, teaching the ancient languages can provide the socity with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that improving language skills, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. according to may own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both school curriculum and getting jobs apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, developing personal skills might increase the consequences of this social ability. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceive notion of social behavior.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of training languages far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of teaching dead languages prove the significane of total outcomes, but also pin point thorny issues’ potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 336, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceive notion of social behavior. To conclud...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, may, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 20.9802955665 76% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 31.9359605911 85% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.75862068966 52% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1362.0 1207.87684729 113% => OK
No of words: 241.0 242.827586207 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.65145228216 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94007293032 3.92707691288 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21200422268 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.684647302905 0.580463131201 118% => OK
syllable_count: 435.6 379.143842365 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.4421794607 50.4703680194 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.818181818 104.977214359 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9090909091 20.9669160288 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.81818181818 7.25397266985 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0940921844424 0.242375264174 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0303311169835 0.0925447433944 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0393282238694 0.071462118173 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0502171595741 0.151781067708 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0458229334027 0.0609392437508 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 12.6369458128 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.49 11.5310837438 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.97 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 55.0591133005 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => 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.