Some people think that it is necessary to travel abroad to learn about other countries, but other people think that it is not necessary to travel abroad because all the information can be seen at TV and the Internet. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Would the Internet substitute the practical travelling abroad, in terms of letting people learn about foreign cultures? Personally, I believe this contention overestimates the function of the Internet, and my reasons will be expounded as below.
The foremost reason against this assertion is that the essence of a culture is much more than simple images. In terms of helping tourists have a deep understanding of local culture in certain areas, real-world international travelling, instead of the Internet, is still a primary means by which a person can immerse themselves in a live cultural environment grasp the cultural cores. For example, by face-to-face interaction with local people, including closely observing, talking, listening, a tourist can directly and practically feel every detail about local traditions, social manners and rules, the way of speaking and thinking, and religious taboos. In comparison, it is impossible for an Internet user to recover the multi-dimensional cultural experience by merely reading texts and pictures on the screen.
Besides, I have significant doubt about the assertion that all information can be accessed on the Internet. For the sake of politics or economy, many counties are still beyond the coverage of the Internet, such as South Korea and some countries in Africa. Similarly, in some religious areas like Tibet, local culture information is rare on the Internet, because visitors are forbidden to take photos inside historical buildings, temples, and religious rituals. That is so saying, practical travelling is the only way for people to watch and appreciate these cultures.
Admittedly, the reason why people agree that the Internet can take the place of real-world travelling is that modern computing technology has been able to fully reveal basic cultural elements. One feature of the Internet is its multi-media function, which can place the audience into a virtual world by displaying text, pictures, videos and audio about a culture simultaneously. In other words, all visual information about a culture, from traditional clothes to old buildings to artistic works, can be available for viewers at home by browsing the Internet.
In conclusion, this argument is indefensible. Although the Internet is capable of furnishing easy and convenient access to the description of a culture based on texts, images and videos, an overall and in-depth understanding of a culture are more than what a person sees and hears. What is more, as for the countries excluded from the Internet, it is only through practical journeys that people can really touch those cultures.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-03-27 | mikeli2021 | 67 | view |
| 2017-12-28 | taifii | 67 | view |
- In some countries that have already achieved affluence any additional economic wealth would not make people happier To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- The spread of multinational companies and increasing globalization and have positive effects on everyone Do you agree or disagree Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your knowledge or experience 78
- In some countries that have already achieved affluence any additional economic wealth would not make people happier To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- Some people think that it is necessary to travel abroad to learn about other countries but other people think that it is not necessary to travel abroad because all the information can be seen at TV and the Internet Discuss both views and give your own opi 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, if, really, similarly, so, still, as for, for example, in conclusion, such as, in other words, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2224.0 1615.20841683 138% => OK
No of words: 408.0 315.596192385 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45098039216 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02297606264 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 176.041082164 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558823529412 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 696.6 506.74238477 137% => 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: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 61.1513235752 49.4020404114 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.0 106.682146367 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.25 7.06120827912 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 3.4128256513 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208970454975 0.244688304435 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0738763677073 0.084324248473 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655362406258 0.0667982634062 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13171114373 0.151304729494 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0663783700762 0.056905535591 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 13.0946893788 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.63 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.79 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 78.4519038076 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.