Band 7.5 - Some people think government should spend money on measures to save languages with few speakers from dying out completely. Others think this is waste of financial resources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. - Solved
User Stance
Some people think government should spend money on measures to save languages with few speakers from dying out completely. Others think this is waste of financial resources. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Many are of the opinion that the authorities ought to allocate national budgets to countermeasures on safeguarding the minorities’ languages from totally disappearing; however, others assume that it is financially wasteful. In order to give an elaborate insight, both points of view will be discussed below via persuasive rationales before giving my own viewpoint.
On the one hand, the governmental protection of uncommon languages from extinction stems from its societal and traditional values, associated with further benefits in tourism. Specifically, in certain countries, the presence of ethnic minorities’ languages is national heritage, which might boost the curiosity from overseas tourists to visit and savour the beauty of their countries. As a result, the economies as well as the tourism of these countries can be improved. For example, Vietnam has 54 peoples with different kinds of languages with each group being helped by the Vietnamese government to preserve the existence of their languages by teaching them to descendants. This diversity is also a reason why foreigners may choose Vietnam to travel as this place has innumerable special things to experience and discover.
On the other hand, opponents undeniably have reasonable arguments. Particularly, they believe that it is unnecessary because there are other attractions such as historic buildings and the stories behind the presence of many countries, which can also make internationally visitors feel curious. Besides, as only few people using these types of languages, they are not economically and socially useful to be conserved. Instead, it is suggested that the governments should spend their money on pressing problems including addressing poverty and climate change, which can directly enhance the living standards of their inhabitants and boost social and economic development. Furthermore, some nations are even in shortage of financial support to uplift their economies and provide adequate food and employment for their residents, let alone preserving cultural values.
In conclusion, although both supporters and critics offer their logical arguments behind their opinions, namely being socially and traditionally valuable and the need for tackling other alarming concerns. I am convinced that the view of abolishing some policies in terms of preservation towards languages with few speakers as it holds more validity in the long run.
11 errors detected: 7 grammar, 3 informality, 1 punctuation.
In-depth Feedback
The essay effectively addresses the question's focus on whether governments should spend money to save languages with few speakers from dying out. It presents a balanced discussion of both views, providing clear arguments and examples for each perspective. The writer's own opinion is also clearly stated, aligning with the task's requirements. The essay is well-structured, with a logical flow and good use of linking words. Vocabulary is varied and appropriate, though there is room for more sophisticated lexical choices. Grammar is mostly accurate, with only minor errors. Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong understanding of the topic and meets the criteria for a high band score.
Detailed Recommendations
The essay fully addresses the question by discussing both views and providing a clear personal opinion. The arguments are well-developed and supported with relevant examples, such as the case of Vietnam. The word count meets the requirement, and the ideas are clearly presented and relevant to the topic.
The essay is well-structured with a clear introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. The ideas flow logically, and linking words are used effectively to connect sentences and paragraphs. There is a good variety of connectors, contributing to the overall coherence and cohesion.
The vocabulary used is varied and generally appropriate, though there is some repetition and a few less sophisticated choices. Spelling is accurate, and collocations are mostly natural. The essay could benefit from more advanced and precise vocabulary to achieve a higher score.
The essay demonstrates a good range of grammatical structures, with mostly accurate use of complex sentences. There are minor errors, but they do not impede understanding. The essay could benefit from more varied and complex sentence structures to achieve a higher score.
Grammatical Errors
Error: "the presence of ethnic minoritiesu2019 languages is national heritage"
Explanation: Missing article before 'national heritage'
Correction: "the presence of ethnic minoritiesu2019 languages is a national heritage"
-
Task Achievement:
-
Coherence & Cohesion:
-
Lexical Resource:
-
Grammatical Range:
Task Achievement
Addresses The Task Fully: 8
Offers Clear, Developed Ideas: 8
Provides Relevant, Specific Support: 8
Fits Appropriate Length: 9
Coherence & Cohesion
Progresses Ideas Logically: 8
Clear Intro & Conclusion: 9
Uses Cohesive Devices Well: 8
Varies Cohesive Devices: 8
Lexical Resource
Varied Vocabulary: 7
Accurate Spelling & Formation: 9
Collocations: 7
Grammatical Range
Mixes Simple & Complex Forms: 7
Accurate Grammar: 7