It is said that people who read books for pleasure have better imagination and language skills than people who watch TV. Do you agree or disagree?
There is an opinion that people who derive pleasure from books are more imaginative and have better lexical skills. Personally, I believe that watching TV is of equal significance to reading books in terms of developing language ability and originality.
On the one hand, there are good reasons to say that watching television programmes can help to enhance one’s language skills and boost imagination. With regard to the former, television viewing can help people to expose themselves to language in different forms such as sounds or words, thus retaining knowledge better and learning how to convey information effectively. For example, through watching “The Debaters” on VTV7, I learned how to get my views across to the audience and make them more persuasive by using illustrations and gestures when making a presentation on a certain topic. As for imagination, television programmes about news, wildlife or tourism enable people to imagine the world around them. In fact, many famous architects in the world have attributed their creative ideas for building houses to the programmes they watched when they were younger.
However, the benefits of television on one’s lexical ability and creative thinking cannot be denied. In fact, it has been scientifically proven that reading is the optimal way to enrich vocabulary, which confers further benefits for one’s study and jobs. For instance, those with a wide range of lexical resources tend to do well at school as they have superior reading skills, which are sharpened through books and physical materials. Additionally, when reading, people usually have to conjure up images of what they read and predict the upcoming scenarios to understand the messages the others send out. This clearly renders the fact that reading is an indispensable tool to hone one’s language skills and stimulate imaginative thinking.
In conclusion, reading is often recommended to improve language capabilities and imagination power for an individual, but the role of TV in the individual’s development of verbal abilities and imaginative thinking should not be underrated.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-06-07 | Hai Anh Phan Thi | 84 | view |
| 2021-08-21 | dinhthu05 | 84 | view |
- Developments in technology have brought various environmental problems Some believe that people need to live simpler lives to solve environmental problems Others however believe technology is the way to solve these problems Discuss both views and give you 89
- Students should be taught academic knowledge so that they can pass exams and skills such as cooking or dressing should not be taught To what extent do you agree disagree 73
- It is often said that the subjects taught in schools are too academic in orientation and that it would be more useful for children to learn about practical matters such as home management work and intepersonal skills To what extent do you agree or disagre 73
- There holds a debate of a large number of Vietnamese that people should stop killing cats and dogs for food since these animals are very friendly and close to people Others still remain this eating habit since these animals supply a huge amount of meat fo 78
- In many countries schools have severe problems with student behavior What do you think are the causes of this What solutions can you suggest 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 33, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'recommended improving'.
Suggestion: recommended improving
...nking. In conclusion, reading is often recommended to improve language capabilities and imagination p...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, thus, well, as for, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, such as, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1796.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 330.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44242424242 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96049284855 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.6 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 563.4 506.74238477 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 42.0923189384 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.153846154 106.682146367 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.3846153846 20.7667163134 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.92307692308 7.06120827912 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.328983527178 0.244688304435 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108507606932 0.084324248473 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0754882760203 0.0667982634062 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.20905242693 0.151304729494 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0936021889179 0.056905535591 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.0946893788 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.78957915832 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.