people communication
It is true that nowadays there is a significant growth in communication through social media instead of face to face contact in people's lives. While this trend is conducive to several positive outcomes, I would maintain that it is overall a negative development.
On the one hand, there are several merits of using social networking sites to communicating. It must be recognised that this helps people maintain relationships that would otherwise be lost by relocation or business. For example, Facebook and Twitter are allowed people to post their pictures or personal changes. This enables sliver surfer to update information about their friends despite the long distance. Another advantage is that those who have psychological problems such as lack self-confidence in the face - to - face meetings could facilitate to express their feeling and thinking.
On the other hand, I believe that such merits are negated by the following drawbacks. Firstly, those who became over-reliant on social networking sites are likely to lack interest in having face-to-face communication. In fact, they prefer solving issues connected with personal life or work using the social messaging system by emojis and smileys rather than meeting in person. As a consequence, people experience problems with understanding real emotions in a professional relationship. In addition to this, people are likely to be victims of scammers when being made friends with strangers. For instance, people could not control a false identity who could be tricked them about personal information. This could be rendered users lost money.
In conclusion, it is obvious that this tendency brings several advantages. However, it is my belief that they are outweighed by the disadvantages.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-11 | vuhongminh | 61 | view |
| 2023-06-24 | Risti | 84 | view |
| 2023-06-21 | Ahmad Rifki Hardiansyah | 73 | view |
| 2022-05-25 | aikzat | 67 | view |
| 2022-05-25 | aikzat | 67 | view |
- The table gives information about consumer spending on different items in five countries in 2002 78
- 1.The amount of money spent on books. 78
- taking a gap year 73
- Visitors in England 73
- The graph demonstrates the proportion of total sales of car producers in four regions of the world over the course of five year 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, so, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1485.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 271.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47970479705 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05940855047 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.594095940959 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.7506944373 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.8125 106.682146367 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.9375 20.7667163134 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.875 7.06120827912 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176590866711 0.244688304435 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0522077081872 0.084324248473 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0753890365682 0.0667982634062 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0988250459276 0.151304729494 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0686814798837 0.056905535591 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 50.2224549098 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.73 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.