A lot of money is spent on old buildings. Instead, they should be demolished and new buildings should be erected.
To what extend do you agree?
Some people believe that historic buildings are not worth being restored and instead funds should be spent on demolishing them and erecting new ones. I strongly disagree with this approach, as heritage side hold not only historic value, but also are a valuable tourist attraction that should be, where possible, restored.
Firstly old buildings are irreplaceable and as such, all effort should be made to preserve them and restore. They hold historic value and demolishing them is akin to erasing our past. Imagine that this reckless attitude would be applied to all heritage sides. Soon enough we would end up as some of the ancient Greek towns did, destroyed by civilizations that followed and stones used to build new structures. As a result, archaeologists struggle to solve some of their mysteries.
Secondly, historic buildings are a great tourist attraction, generating revenue by bringing tourist from all over the world. Take Oxford, a city that managed to preserve most of its heritage structures, with narrow pebbled roads, castle and one of the oldest universities in the world. Until this day, it attracts thousands of visitors every year, bringing profit to a multitude of businesses.
Thirdly, I do not think it is a choice between old and new, between past and future. I strongly believe that both can be easily married to create an inimitable panorama of the city, like it was done in Birmingham's centre. It is a great example of restoring old buildings where possible, while extending them and filling available space with modern, even avant-garde structures, creating very diverse, but historically responsible spaces.
In conclusion, old buildings should not be demolished but renewed to maintain the historic value, as well as to bring profits by attracting visitors.
- Graph chart computers 78
- Successful sport professional can earn a great deal more money than other important professionals 73
- Space exploration 73
- Pie chart land degeneration 67
- Nowadays we re producing more and more rubbish Why do you think this is happening What can the government do to help reduce amount of rubbish 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 292, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...e sides, soon enough we would end up as some of the ancient Greek towns did, destroyed by c...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, well, while, as to, in conclusion, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1512.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 287.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26829268293 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82576463859 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609756097561 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9678222974 49.4020404114 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.307692308 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0769230769 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.46153846154 7.06120827912 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.331773248645 0.244688304435 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112732310204 0.084324248473 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.116565206168 0.0667982634062 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.193505173192 0.151304729494 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103370953622 0.056905535591 182% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 78.4519038076 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.