In today’s world of advanced science and technology, we still greatly value our artists such as musicians, painters and writers. What can art tell us about life that science and technology cannot?
Nowadays, technology and advance science play a major part in making mankinds’ lives easier in many aspects. In the present, almost all people across the globe understand the precious values of musicians, writers, and painters. In this essay, I will argue about why the new technology is not tech about our old languages and traditional methods.
To comments with, literature works from great personalities of the past, who provide enough evidence about much older symbols and speaking languages, which it cannot learn by new technologies. It derives from their works. For example, in New Zealand, there were nearly 10 speaking ancient languages had out from the danger of extinction because the grammar was found in caves in 2010. This attracted many citizens who learn about it. The more historical works people have, the more they will learn about it. This is impossible by new developments in science.
In addition to this, historical arts bring also many traditional methods, which were highly used by many people in the past centuries. And which are still beneficial for many ones in the present as well as the future. For example, in India, in the past, citizens do namaste, when they had to greet another person. It is still useful in many places as well, and most citizens use these as a sign of great value when they are on special occasions. Hence, traditional methods and spiritual things cannot be archived by advanced science and technology. It always came from arts and works from the past.
In conclusion, although new achievements in the high tech world and many fields of science make humans’ lives easier as compared to the past, several things always come from old works done by many people such as writers, musicians, and painters. This main reason why people understand these types of artists’ works.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 118, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...ds of science make humans’ lives easier as compared to the past, several things al...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, so, still, well, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1534.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 304.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04605263158 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58155581029 2.80592935109 92% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.542763157895 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 457.2 506.74238477 90% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.7508354205 49.4020404114 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.2352941176 106.682146367 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8823529412 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.29411764706 7.06120827912 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.156522750013 0.244688304435 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0484820701441 0.084324248473 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0467407604338 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102728362776 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.052329847982 0.056905535591 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.0946893788 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 50.2224549098 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.3001002004 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.58950901804 90% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 78.4519038076 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.