As cities expanding some people believe the government should look forward to creating better networks of public
transportation available for everyone rather than building more roads for vehicle owning population. What's your
opinion? Give some examples or experiences to support.
Recently, the phenomenon of cities expansion has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question "What step can be taken to tackle this challenge?". Whereas, it is a widely held view that governments must remain liable for creating better public transportation. I will discuss the controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the environmental standpoint, private vehicles are bound up inextricably with greenhouse gases, which indicates they lead to both air pollution and traffic congestion. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2012 demonstrates the relationship between global warming and climate change as well as an exponential increase in car accidents. Their academic criticism was impressive. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far supports the contention that the likelihood of the number of roads is correlated positively with not only accident fatalities but also deforestation.
Within the realm of socio-economy, without the slightest doubt, public transportation attribute to commuting improvement, in that it would come down to electric cars, faster commutes, and modern cities. A salient example of such attribution is fossil fuels, which is a cause of concern since it was mistaken to take traffic flow for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars have had the opportunity to pinpoint employing traffic measures problems. Likewise, hardly had they confined their attention to pedestrians, traffic-free zones and even carpooling. Hence, it is correct to infer the pivotal role of a developed transportation system.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes "all's well that ends well," after analyzing what elaborated above, I believe that creating a better transportation network is highly beneficial. Meanwhile, as a feasible solution, the local authorities are recommended to enforce some strict legislation, and individuals are hoped to heighten their intellect.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 78, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...ying goes 'alls well that ends well,' after analyzing what elaborated above,...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, if, likewise, so, thus, well, whereas, while, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.5418719212 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 31.9359605911 113% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 5.75862068966 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1739.0 1207.87684729 144% => OK
No of words: 297.0 242.827586207 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.85521885522 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38287169803 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 139.433497537 151% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.707070707071 0.580463131201 122% => OK
syllable_count: 527.4 379.143842365 139% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 12.6551724138 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.4532028784 50.4703680194 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.214285714 104.977214359 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2142857143 20.9669160288 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.85714285714 7.25397266985 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => 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: 0.175762687153 0.242375264174 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0460673455631 0.0925447433944 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0591253780734 0.071462118173 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100635532509 0.151781067708 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0655932972992 0.0609392437508 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 12.6369458128 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.71 11.5310837438 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.06 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 55.0591133005 218% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.94827586207 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 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.