When a country develops its technology, the traditional skills and ways of life die out. It is pointless to try to keep them alive. To what extend do you agree or disagree?
Traditional skills we know of before technological advancements took over are gradually shaving off. Although some people believe it is for the best, I strongly disagree that it should disappear forever.
Many people consider its disappearance to be inevitable. They conclude that once it is gone, development of new trends using these developing technologies will emerge, believing that these trends will benefit many people, especially for the fast paced lifestyle our society lives at the moment, making them more productive on their work and enjoy life to the fullest amidst their busy schedules. In addition, they confirm that these basic ways will just be a hindrance to its further development, since people clinging to traditional ways can become defiant in taking or purchasing these new choices laid in front of them.
However, the agreeing views of some people on this troubling issue will not deface my decision. Although I am not against a country for developing its technology, it is wrong to let the traditional ways be tossed aside. This action could kill the uniqueness of a culture. For instance, their food produced by a particular traditional way for more than a generation may become identical to other cuisines or lose its authenticity if prepared by the newest equipment we have today. Another thing is the cost of these emerging technologies. Since not all people can afford them yet, many will resort to the basics. Once they are gone, they will be at a loss in making their own needs.
In summary, technological developments can kill our traditional ways of living. But it should not make these basics disappear, even if people say it is for the best.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, then, another thing, for instance, in addition, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 24.0651302605 166% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 41.998997996 71% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1411.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 278.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07553956835 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83530145138 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.589928057554 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 506.74238477 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 79.3739856114 49.4020404114 161% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.785714286 106.682146367 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8571428571 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.07142857143 7.06120827912 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => 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: 0.15775381772 0.244688304435 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0545849929014 0.084324248473 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.054854713615 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0973266595661 0.151304729494 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0220352845043 0.056905535591 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.0946893788 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 78.4519038076 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.