In the modern world, it is possible to shop, work and communicate online without face-to-face contact. Is it a positive or negative development?
Nowadays, manifold aspects of life have undergone massive changes, such as the way people shop, work, and communicate with no need of face-to-face interaction. Although there could be a number of drawbacks involved in this trend, the benefits accruing to online life are by no means negligible.
On the plus side, the advantages for the internet world are numerous. To begin with, spending more quality time with their family, many employees are able to work remotely. This simply means that there can be no time constraints and stressful commuting for them. In addition, prospective buyers now are capable of conveniently purchasing their needs online, irrespective of how far-flung corners of the country they reside. Finally, it has never been easier and more convenient to make contact with each another throughout the entire history. The internet has laid the groundwork for the communication of millions of people across the globe. Take those social network applications like Instagram or Whats app as an example; they have expedited human’s interaction on a massive scale. Therefore, online life has revolutionised the way people live in various facets.
However, the downside cannot be ignored. The most axiomatic argument may be concerned with people’s means of communication. To explain more, the more these aforementioned social applications are used, the fewer people are bound to have face-to-face interaction with one another. As a result, day by day, people are forgetting the importance and value of true means of socialising in the old-faction way through in-person interactions.
In conclusion, online life, like everything else, has its ups and downs. I, however, think that it is more a positive development; since many social and time-related conundrums have been totally eradicated by the existence of the internet.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 699, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
... network applications like Instagram or Whats app as an example; they have expedited ...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 102, Rule ID: MORE_A_JJ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a more positive'?
Suggestion: a more positive
...and downs. I, however, think that it is more a positive development; since many social and time...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, may, so, therefore, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1560.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 287.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43554006969 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04742030385 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 176.041082164 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.620209059233 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 499.5 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.5104997858 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.5 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9375 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5625 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14706853462 0.244688304435 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0418032110089 0.084324248473 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0577858996734 0.0667982634062 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0931603018426 0.151304729494 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0571231914774 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.0946893788 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 78.4519038076 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.