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 the city expansion and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of transportation development 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 can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, making better network for public transport can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of transport costs, as well as road transportation, are inextricably bound up. 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 legislations apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, building more roads might increase the consequences of traffic congestion. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of road improvements could relate to this reality that the demerits of road accidents pertain to using public safety. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downsides of road construction projects are correlated negatively with being expensive. 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 facilitating car ownership far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of road improvements prove the significance of public convenience, but also pinpoint transport development implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... analyze that throughout this essay. From a social standpoint, making better ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...legislations apparently can be seen. Within the realm of science, building mo...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...otion 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 : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.75862068966 191% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1558.0 1207.87684729 129% => OK
No of words: 264.0 242.827586207 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.90151515152 5.00649968141 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38587210859 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 139.433497537 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.662878787879 0.580463131201 114% => OK
syllable_count: 481.5 379.143842365 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => 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: 47.1749109403 50.4703680194 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.833333333 104.977214359 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.9669160288 105% => 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 : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240623191845 0.242375264174 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722359058508 0.0925447433944 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0619226919622 0.071462118173 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130554994464 0.151781067708 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0161085383905 0.0609392437508 26% => 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: 17.4 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.94 11.5310837438 147% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.83 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 55.0591133005 185% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => 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.