Due to the widespread use of technological devices like smartphone and computers, some concers have risen among people over the effect that such tools could have on the way people interact with each other. Many claim that these days verbal communication inside families has almost died, while in the past family members were more likely to speak to each other. I do not believe that things have changed so much nowadays but there are some aspects worth being analyzed and some downsides ensued by the digital revolution, which should be taken into account as well.
A family is gathered around a table, the only noises are those from the kids, the stove, the kitchen and dishes. There is no TV, no radio, no computer and nobody is starring at his smartphone. Maybe the father is reading the newspaper before dinner is served. This could have been a typical dinner in a family living decades ago. In those days electronic devices like cell phones, TV or simply appliances have not been invented yet. In such a situation, we could conclude that people were more prone to speak to each other and express their feelings, which would be the most logical way to kill the time.
Although this scenario was very common, we should also mention than in the past education and rules were more strickt than they are today. In most of the cases children could speak only when allowed to do and women did not enjoy much freedom as well. It is therefore wrong to say that in the past family members talked more to each other than nowadays.
On the other hand, trying to analyze how technology has been affecting our lives since the last decades, we can actually observe that more and more people tend to spend too much time with their smartphones, checking messages, texting, surfing the internet and looking for items on sale. It hes become commonplace these days to see people bent on their devices unable to pay attention to the world around them but only focussed on the digital life imbedded the smartphone. The scene now has changed. The same family is gathered around the table, nobody is speaking but they are all typing on their devices, while appliances take care of the food and the dishwasher is ready to start. On the background a TV is broadcasting news nobody is paying attention to.
Althoug the explosion of digital technology can have its drawbacks, the silver lining of those devices is that indeed allows to reach out family members faster than in the past. It is also not true that communication inside a family is gone. Nobody is forced to use a smartphone or leaving the TV on the whole day. Nowadays it is still possbile to talk to each other, to open ourselves and to express our doubts, fears and dreams to our relatives.
To conclude, time does not play any role when it comes to communication. In the past as well as today, people are able to talk to each other. Technology can affect the way we communicate, but education and mentality also play a crucial role. From my point of view therefore I do not believe that nowadays communication between family members has worsened or plummeted compared to the past.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 207, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun claim seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many claims'.
Suggestion: Many claims
...he way people interact with each other. Many claim that these days verbal communication in...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 200, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[2]
Message: Did you mean 'doing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'allow' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: doing
... children could speak only when allowed to do and women did not enjoy much freedom as...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 290, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: he's
...ernet and looking for items on sale. It hes become commonplace these days to see pe...
^^^
Line 7, column 126, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'reaching'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'allow' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: reaching
... of those devices is that indeed allows to reach out family members faster than in the p...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, look, may, so, still, therefore, well, while, as to, as well as, on the whole, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 13.1623246493 236% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 10.4138276553 202% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 24.0651302605 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 77.0 41.998997996 183% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2586.0 1615.20841683 160% => OK
No of words: 549.0 315.596192385 174% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.71038251366 5.12529762239 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84053189512 4.20363070211 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42903533805 2.80592935109 87% => OK
Unique words: 273.0 176.041082164 155% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497267759563 0.561755894193 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 821.7 506.74238477 162% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 16.0721442886 156% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.1832949404 49.4020404114 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.44 106.682146367 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.96 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.38176352705 137% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 3.9879759519 276% => Less 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: 0.21137369352 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0542775984908 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621267290822 0.0667982634062 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117044031228 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0666241550739 0.056905535591 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.0946893788 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 50.2224549098 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.04 12.4159519038 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.78 8.58950901804 91% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
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.