Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of people. Some people say that governments should spend public money on saving these languages, while others believe that would be a waste of money.
Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
Rare languages with a limited number of speakers are on the verge of extinction. Conflicting opinions exist on whether or not governments should preserve such languages with public funds. I tend to agree that the authorities should do them a favor.
Governments are obligated to conserve culture, including all tangible and intangible cultures. As a form of intangible culture, languages appear to be tools through which people can share and communicate their ideas, beliefs, arts, and histories. Many languages are fading away, which implies that the cultures of the people who once spoke them are disappearing. Apart from that, learning a variety of languages might help historians to have a better understanding of the evolution of the civilization composed of speakers of rare languages. So, it is logical for the government to use public money to save rare languages.
On the contrary, there is an alternative perspective that considers it a waste of money. These groups are reluctant to use public funds to save languages from extinction since governments in some countries with poverty or epidemics frequently lack the resources necessary to meet the necessities of their citizens. Instead of using the money to protect minority languages, they would much rather use it to raise the standard of living for the population. However, it is feasible to request the preservation of several languages from the United Nations or international charitable foundations. It should not simply be dropped due to poverty or diseases.
In conclusion, I believe that governments must work to prevent the extinction of local languages and that the United Nations has a role in supporting those countries that are struggling financially to finish their tasks.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-05-14 | hoaithuongnguyen | 78 | view |
| 2023-05-09 | hoaithuongnguyen | 73 | view |
| 2023-05-09 | hoaithuongnguyen | 61 | view |
| 2023-05-09 | hoaithuongnguyen | 61 | view |
| 2022-08-07 | Hanabi | 56 | view |
- IS PROTECTIONISM GOOD OR BAD 73
- What are some of the reasons firms engage in FDI 11
- Is free trade good or bad 80
- As well as making money businesses should also have social responsibilities To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- As well as making money businesses also have social responsibilities Do you agree or disagree 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 112, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...tinction. Conflicting opinions exist on whether or not governments should preserve such langua...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, so, apart from, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1481.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 277.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34657039711 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04628973345 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 176.041082164 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.574007220217 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.2691230507 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.785714286 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7857142857 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.92857142857 7.06120827912 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
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: 0.314525875966 0.244688304435 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0926913282436 0.084324248473 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0391513982504 0.0667982634062 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16636613579 0.151304729494 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0463457006999 0.056905535591 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 78.4519038076 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.