Opinions are divided into the implications of international integration. While many suppose that such cooperation would be beneficial considering that it would lead to an increase in trade activities and cultural richness levels, critics believe that it would be the culprit behind the degradation of cultural values, such as a deterioration in languages and domestic lifestyles. This essay will deal with these two views and express my opinion on them.
On the one hand, growing international interaction is believed to be a positive development given that it would open up growth opportunities for involved countries in many aspects. In terms of business, firms, especially those in developing countries, would reap the benefits from the disappearance of trade barriers, such as reaching potential customers beyond national borders or attracting more foreign investment. Moreover, employees would be able to work overseas in multinational corporates. Regarding national culture, thanks to transnational integration, the engaged country can not only enrich its own culture with the world’s cultural quintessence but also promote its image in others’ eyes. For example, Vietnam, after the Renovation policies imposed in 1986, has experienced unprecedented economic gains and attracted more interest in its cultural values compared to the country’s situation before the year 1980.
On the other hand, a commonly associated risk of borderless contact is that it would pose a threat to national specialties considering two following reasons. First, the dominance of affluent countries’ cultures can overshadow others’ cultural identities by virtue of globalization. This would be exemplified by a tendency in Thailand in which its young generation have a preference for American and Korean entertainment products rather than their domestic songs or films. Such a trend, as a result, would take a heavy toll on a country’s own values. Second, given that cross-cultural activities underline the necessity of international languages, native dialects, especially minor ones, could be driven to the verge of extinction. In fact, most people would prefer to do business or interact in commonly spoken languages such as English or Chinese.
From my standpoint, both arguments would surely be compelling as they are the true reflections of the possibilities of an ever-growing economic and cultural interaction among nations. Such exchange is an inevitable tendency that can be considered as either a golden opportunity for a country to grasp or a challenge for it to overcome in terms of cultural growth. Hence, both governments and individuals should take appropriate actions to protect distinct cultures from being submerged by other cultural or economic influences.
In conclusion, the expansion of international ties would pose a dilemma when it both exerts advantages for the economic and cultural development of engaged nations and create tensions between global culture and a country’s national identity. Therefore, the authorities as well as citizens should have further consideration of this phenomenon.
- Some wild animals are disappeared as a natural process It is believed that people have no reason to protect animals Do you agree or disagree and give your own opinion 89
- As well as making money businesses also have social responsibilities To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- Advertisements are becoming more and more common in everyday life Is it a positive or negative development 56
- The charts below show the proportion of people s total spending in a particular European country was spent on different commodities and services in 1958 and in 2008 89
- Some people hold that we should spend money and time on the protection of wild animals while others suggest that the money should be spent on populations living in the poorest areas of the world What is your opinion 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, moreover, regarding, second, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, as a result, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 7.85571142285 242% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 41.998997996 152% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 8.3376753507 252% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2655.0 1615.20841683 164% => OK
No of words: 466.0 315.596192385 148% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.6974248927 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64618479453 4.20363070211 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25502528919 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 176.041082164 151% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.570815450644 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 825.3 506.74238477 163% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.9302771182 49.4020404114 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.736842105 106.682146367 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5263157895 20.7667163134 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.15789473684 7.06120827912 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223991842701 0.244688304435 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0667768201419 0.084324248473 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0509357611021 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127815927522 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0189828061565 0.056905535591 33% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.0946893788 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.08 12.4159519038 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.88 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 78.4519038076 190% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.78957915832 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.