Electronic devices are destroying the quality of human interaction. Do you argee or disargee with the statement?
In contemporary society, it is common to see a person with his phone everywhere, which reflects to the fact that electronic devices are having more and more serious impacts on human interaction. From my perspectives, I completely agree with that statement on account of the lost traditional ways of contacting and the gap resulting in.
First and foremost, it is undeniable that customary means of keeping in touch have been fading away since technology was invented and widely utilized as indispensable item for most of people all over the world. Due to the convenience and massive coverage, the Internet is chosen as main form of interacting among community. As a consequence, this leads to the gradual disappearance of retrospective contacting methods. The most prime example of this matter is handwriting-letters, which have been forgotten for few decades owing to the strong development of science and technology. A letter written by hand consists of the sender's sincerity and affection for the receiver; it is, nonetheless, losing in an era of mass communication.
Last but not least, there is a resolute assertion that devastated quality of human interplay itself results in the gap among human. Not only in public places but in households as well, they only pay attention to their phones, take notice of nobody. In other words, they have a tendency to isolate themselves from ever-changing world and dive in their own ones on the Internet. By virtue of this, there will be less and less interactivity between members in a union, which makes them find it strenuous to see through each other and easily have conflicts with them.
In conclusion, that the technology is aggravating contact of human is totally agreed due to the adverse effects with regard to long-standing means of interplay and distance.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 177, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
...dely utilized as indispensable item for most of people all over the world. Due to the convenie...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 623, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'senders'' or 'sender's'?
Suggestion: senders'; sender's
... letter written by hand consists of the senders sincerity and affection for the receive...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, nonetheless, so, well, in conclusion, in other words, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 7.85571142285 13% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1519.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 296.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13175675676 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10826784255 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.618243243243 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 480.6 506.74238477 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.4346200147 49.4020404114 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.583333333 106.682146367 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6666666667 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 7.06120827912 94% => OK
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 : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.142079663106 0.244688304435 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0442718274977 0.084324248473 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0505565198223 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0863160144382 0.151304729494 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0527699668033 0.056905535591 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.78957915832 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.