People have the views that more resources should be allocated on building railways rather than roads. I completely agree with the idea that further development of railways is beneficial for all members in the society.
There are several reasons why the government should pay more efforts on the infrastructure of railways. Firstly, the population of the town grows dramatically in recent years, the roads have a great burden due to the increasing number of buses and private cars. By contrast, the rail systems can provide an alternative transport for citizens, and each rail can carry massive passengers in a journey. Secondly, the railways can reduce the traffic accidents which caused by manual errors. Although rails also require the manual control, the signal systems always monitor the safety of operations and ensure the trains arrive the destinations on time. Finally, the railways are more environmental friendly for the society. It is evident that the pollutants emitted by rails are much fewer than that of cars.
On the other hand, it is perhaps fewer funds are required on the developing the roads. In our city, most of the roads are well developed, governments only need to spend money on the maintenances and operations of roads. The development of extra roads is not necessary in current. Furthermore, the problems of congestions on the roads are mainly due to the increasing number of cars. Therefore, providing alternative transport systems is more appropriate in relieve the pressures on roads.
In conclusion, my opinion is that government should spend more money on constructing railways that can benefits our lives and reduce the burden on roads.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 305, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'alternative transport'.
Suggestion: alternative transport
... contrast, the rail systems can provide an alternative transport for citizens, and each rail can carry m...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1411.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 269.0 315.596192385 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24535315985 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85195293122 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 176.041082164 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.531598513011 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 430.2 506.74238477 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.7082327 49.4020404114 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.0666666667 106.682146367 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9333333333 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06120827912 109% => OK
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 : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => 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: 0.210032199959 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.066362731918 0.084324248473 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0713433205388 0.0667982634062 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154697693223 0.151304729494 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0726852075772 0.056905535591 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.87 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 78.4519038076 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.