Marriage ceremonies are increasingly becoming excessively bigger and costly in many countries. Although these occasions are significant for many people, some attributes make this practice a negative development.
First of all, a massive amount of food is wasted in the name of big weddings, which would otherwise feed on several people. In other words, one of the primary factors that a wedding is regarded as an expensive and huge is the types of cuisines and the amount of food being served to guests. Unable to eat, many guests often leave a generous amount of that in their plate itself, leading to an abundance of food wastage. For instance, 10 tons of eatables that are sufficient for 1 million people to eat is going into dump yard every year because of such celebrations. Therefore, an increasing number of large weddings can be led to negative development.
Furthermore, these occasions call for significant energy that can be otherwise used for several days or even months in a typical household. More precisely, in many countries, marriage functions take place more than four to five days with different rituals and themes that consume energy massively. For instance, I was shocked to learn that a wedding I visited last year that lasted for four days with multiple celebrations, that they used a thousand kilowatts of electricity. This energy can be used by an average middle-class family for a year. Thus, such wastage exemplifies that the practice of costly weddings is not acceptable.
In conclusion, people are misusing necessities, such as food and power in the name of big and expensive weddings. As this continues, the rate of food and power shortages increases to a certain extent every year. As a result of this, this approach can be defined as a negative development.
- In many countries weddings are getting bigger and more expensive than the past Is this a positive or negative development 73
- Some people think that men are naturally more competitive than women To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- The responsibility for the environment rests with the individual and not only with the government Do you agree or disagree 78
- The best way to solve the world s environmental problem is to increase the price of fuel To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 74
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 213, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e this practice a negative development. First of all, a massive amount of food i...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, so, therefore, thus, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1502.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 297.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.05723905724 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88903408236 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.552188552189 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 484.2 506.74238477 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.6391721028 49.4020404114 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.133333333 106.682146367 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.6 7.06120827912 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.175407422588 0.244688304435 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619880267158 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0480537058459 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115500507249 0.151304729494 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0330877633153 0.056905535591 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.4159519038 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 78.4519038076 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.