In many countries today, people buy a range of household goods (television, microwave, oven, and rice cookers) Is it a positive or negative development?
Home appliance has brought significant benefits to our lives in the past fifty years. Yet there remain some disagreements as to whether the growing use of household goods is positive or negative. While there are valid arguments to the contrary, it is my personal view that the benefits of them far outweigh the drawbacks.
First of all, it is an indisputable fact that household goods facilitate the way we do household chores. Not only does the use of house goods reduce time needed to complete the tasks, but it is also economical in terms of finance. Take the case of rice cook as a salient example. We used to have to buy coal and then make it burn to cook the rice which took hours and is costly. With the use of rice cookers, however, cooking the rice can be done just by a push of a button.
Equally important, the growing use of house goods causes the users to be more intelligent. Were it not for television, it would be difficult for us to catch the news as well as watch live game show. Controlling these devices, furthermore, forces users to read the instruction and apply into practical cases, which in consequence make users wiser. Even though the risk of obesity resulted from the very comfortable life is real, it can be eliminated easily by not abusing them to an extent.
By way of conclusion, I once again reaffirm my position that purchasing household goods exerts positive impact on our lives rather than detrimental effects. In the year to come, I do believe that education programs showing how to use electronic device smartly and properly should be provided widely to reduce the risk of sedentary lifestyle.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 123, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
...rs. Yet there remain some disagreements as to whether the growing use of household goods is p...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Equally,
...n be done just by a push of a button. Equally important, the growing use of house goo...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, so, then, well, while, as to, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1350.0 1615.20841683 84% => OK
No of words: 287.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.70383275261 5.12529762239 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65879915226 2.80592935109 95% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606271777003 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 442.8 506.74238477 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.0769819466 49.4020404114 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.4285714286 106.682146367 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.142778628545 0.244688304435 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0478435077581 0.084324248473 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.04604792866 0.0667982634062 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0805840635959 0.151304729494 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0386721164132 0.056905535591 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 13.0946893788 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 50.2224549098 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.98 12.4159519038 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 78.4519038076 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.