Language is a key part for not only communication but also for our culture. Some people believe that it is not necessary to waste money on dying languages, while others argue that governments have the responsibility to conserve the endangered ones. In my opinion, the former one deserves to be advocated.
Some may defend the necessity to prevent the old languages from extinction by indicating that they represent the culture and are essential factor for a civilization. History, literature or the building ways for great landmarks which are mostly written or recorded in the old language can be lost once their language dies out. As a prime example, the extinction of old Egyptian language leads to the mystery of the construction of pyramid and this great symbol of ancient civilization still baffles scholars who study ancient breakthroughs for academic research.
However, some languages are hard to speak, which add evidence for the irretrievable death of these ancient ones. Compared with the those which are prevalent in this modern society, these endangered languages are not simplified and improved by people as the time passes by, making them extremely complicated and not worthy to be conserved. Especially in current world where international language gradually becomes the main trend because of globalization, it is easy for the public to abandon those language which are difficult for people to master in work places.
Additionally, it is tough to reverse the decline of minor languages because their revitalization requires much more efforts than the public can expect. Hebrew, once extincted yet currently revived, can be the best example to illustrate this point. From the start of its revival initiated in 19th century to the time when its status as a massively used language finally won international recognition in 20th century, Jews spent decades to promote their campaign. Besides the time needed, the huge Jewish population is another factor for the final success. However, this can not be replicated for other endangered language which is only used by minorities.
In conclusion, the reversion of extincting languages by governmental efforts is unnecessary. Although protecting extinct languages bring benefits for culture-related researches, their difficulties for speaking and revitalization make this goal tough to achieve in the reality.
- It is more important to use your own knowledge and experience than ask others for knowledge and experience to solve problems Do you agree or disagree 70
- People think that old buildings should be knocked down and give way to the modern buildings. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 89
- Do you agree or disagree that students should be encouraged to study STEM courses rather than the majors they like. 76
- Transnational marriage has brought more benefits than drawbacks. Do you agree or disagree? 11
- Modern agriculture methods damage the environment, but providing food for the growing population around the world is more important than protecting the environment. Do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 10, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'defends'.
Suggestion: defends
...e deserves to be advocated. Some may defend the necessity to prevent the old langua...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 493, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this language' or 'those languages'?
Suggestion: this language; those languages
...n, it is easy for the public to abandon those language which are difficult for people to maste...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 656, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...guage which is only used by minorities. In conclusion, the reversion of extincti...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, finally, however, if, may, so, still, while, in conclusion, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2010.0 1615.20841683 124% => OK
No of words: 369.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44715447154 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04653816969 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 176.041082164 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.574525745257 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 641.7 506.74238477 127% => 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: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.2535138114 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.625 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0625 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8125 7.06120827912 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162559156576 0.244688304435 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0588554936479 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0506922948725 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101720354285 0.151304729494 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0487709367026 0.056905535591 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.63 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.57 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 78.4519038076 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => 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.