In many nations, people in huge cities either live alone or in small family units, instead of a large, extended family. Is this a positive or negative trend?
fIn this day and age, many countries and regions have witnessed the emergence of a new tendency in which people from large cities often opt for living by themselves or in nuclear families in lieu of large, multigenerational family units. Albeit several benefits offered by this tendency including privacy and the so-called improved ‘survival’ skills, I am of the opinion that this should be deemed an overall negative development for both society and each individual.
Smaller family size or solo living might be beneficial to a certain extent. In fact, a nuclear family, to my knowledge, offers members ample opportunity to develop a sense of individuality through freedom of choice, increased privacy and simultaneously reduce reliance on others. this shares a causal relationship with fewer family conflicts, as often exemplified in extended families where every member always voices their opinions and asserts personal demands without meticulous consideration about the others. Furthermore/ What is more, living on one’s own benefits each individual due largely to self-reliance in which responsibility will be shouldered to complete every task. Thus, it is believed to probably enhance ‘survival’ skills such as communication ability and interpersonal skills. A typical example of this would be my best friend, who has been living separately from parents for almost 10 years. He is currently in charge of fulfilling household chores, allocating part of his income for various bills and delivering significant decisions on several life matters. All the hurdles have successfully been addressed, which results in his confidence and gracious manners, coupled with flexible personal skills.
On the other hand, I wholeheartedly contend that a shift from multigenerational families to smaller family units presents more drawbacks. From an individual’s perspective, those who live alone are susceptible to isolation and might gradually develop potentially life-threatening symptoms relating to depression like suicidal thoughts. Under unexpected circumstances, these individuals, rather than calling for help from family members, might be put at risk if, for example, a heart attack happens, thereby jeopardising their own life on account of unavailable medical assistance. From a social perspective, more burdens would be placed on each nuclear family where both parents should attempt to work industriously for better sustainable finance. Undoubtedly, these families, and perhaps an increasing number of struggling two-generation households, will be locked into a vicious circle of poverty, and exert detrimental influences on socio-economic development in the long run.
In conclusion, although the choice of living alone or in nuclear families is closely connected with enhanced life skills and more privacy, I still hold a firm belief that this tendency brings about more disadvantages in terms of individual isolation and a slow-down factor for social development.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: FIn
fIn this day and age, many countries and re...
^^^
Line 3, column 281, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
...multaneously reduce reliance on others. this shares a causal relationship with fewer...
^^^^
Line 3, column 514, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...iculous consideration about the others. Furthermore/ What is more, living on one’s own bene...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 298, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...low-down factor for social development.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, if, so, still, thus, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, what is more, 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: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 41.998997996 145% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2551.0 1615.20841683 158% => OK
No of words: 442.0 315.596192385 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.77149321267 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58517132086 4.20363070211 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27443103604 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 273.0 176.041082164 155% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.617647058824 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 797.4 506.74238477 157% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.1240084706 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.4375 106.682146367 149% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.625 20.7667163134 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.9375 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.2105114928 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0673543518798 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.068299270762 0.0667982634062 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1362322511 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0464576355247 0.056905535591 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.6 13.0946893788 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 50.2224549098 54% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 11.3001002004 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.48 12.4159519038 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.44 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 153.0 78.4519038076 195% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.