Before the revolution of industrilization, peopeo normally make their own clothes and tools. People also sew and repair their belongs after broken or worn out. However, nowadays people seldem sew their torn out clothes and fix their broken tools. Skills such as sewing and fixing seem disappeared. This phenomenon appears due to a better quantity of products and abundant supply of commodities.
The better quality of products refrains people from constantly repairing tools and clothes. Materials nowadays are more durable than the past. Stainless steel will not rust. Newly invented material- ninon for example- maintains in good condition for decades. On the contrary, wool and cotten decay in a few years. Therefore, with products made from materials of better quality than the past, people do not need to fix their bikes and scarfs. Apart form this reason, tha abundant supply of commodities also contribute to this phenomenon.
People nowadays prefer not to repair broken equipments and garments due to a plentiful supply of commodities. Globalization enables price of commodities to decrease; therefore, people have access to abundant of goods. People can buy new products instead of repairing broken ones. After joining the WTO, Chinese people also stop sewing and fixing old stuff. To buy a new product is effortless comparing to reapair the broken one. Thus, people choose not to sew and fix broken tools with effortless access to plenty amount of commodities.
To summarize, the better quality of products and the abundance of commodities make sewing and repairing broken stuffs unnecessary. Therefore these skills disappeared recenlty.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 443, Rule ID: APART_FORM[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'apart from'?
Suggestion: Apart from
...not need to fix their bikes and scarfs. Apart form this reason, tha abundant supply of com...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 132, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...nd repairing broken stuffs unnecessary. Therefore these skills disappeared recenlty.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, therefore, thus, for example, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 13.1623246493 15% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 0.0 7.30460921844 0% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 24.0651302605 37% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1408.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 257.0 315.596192385 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47859922179 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76140707687 2.80592935109 98% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 176.041082164 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540856031128 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 422.1 506.74238477 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 12.0 20.2975951904 59% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.084820472 49.4020404114 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 70.4 106.682146367 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 12.85 20.7667163134 62% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.1 7.06120827912 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.9879759519 251% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.167149086662 0.244688304435 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0537304896837 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0400159895909 0.0667982634062 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110878867304 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0414163660573 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.0946893788 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.3 50.2224549098 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.3001002004 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.62 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.58950901804 99% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.0 9.78957915832 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 6.8 10.1190380762 67% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.