Cities are now expanding; the government should make better network for public transport or should build more roads to facilitate car ownership? Agree or Disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of cities are expanding; the government should make a better network for public transport and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that building more roads to facilitate cars ownership be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the social standpoint, making a better network can provide society with some noticeable effects which are in the fact that ultimate outcomes as well as crucial issues. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both transport requirements and complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of the public arena, the road improvement industry for private cars might increase the consequences of critical needs. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of road improvements relate to this reality that the demerits of road accidents pertain to using private transports. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downsides of creative processes are correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of improving public transportation network far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of public convenience, but also pinpoint transportation development implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ll analyze that throughout this essay. From the social standpoint, making a bet...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ted procedures apparently can be seen. Within the realm of the public arena, th...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... notion of this remarkable phenomenon. To conclude, while there are several com...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 31.9359605911 94% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1581.0 1207.87684729 131% => OK
No of words: 270.0 242.827586207 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.85555555556 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29005026208 2.71678728327 121% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 139.433497537 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.659259259259 0.580463131201 114% => OK
syllable_count: 499.5 379.143842365 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.0766226748 50.4703680194 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.75 104.977214359 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 20.9669160288 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 7.25397266985 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.33497536946 56% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.286707094376 0.242375264174 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0847033808147 0.0925447433944 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107906710892 0.071462118173 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152381544466 0.151781067708 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.120927103431 0.0609392437508 198% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 53.1260098522 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.0 11.5310837438 147% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.1 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.