Nowadays the way many people interact with each other has changed because of technology.
In what ways has technology affected the types of relationships people make?
Is this a positive or negative development?
It is an obvious fact that technology has had an influence on communication between people. It has taken effect on our relationships in variety of ways. And I am of the opinion that there are both positive and negative effects.
Earlier, there are several ways in which new technology has impacted on the way people communicate with each other. Firstly, social media like telephones or the Internet allow businessmen to interact people in other countries with online meeting, especially in the period of social distancing owing to Covid-19. Secondly, social networks such as Facebook, Wechat or Instagram help people make many new friends, find people having common interests or chat with friends. Finally, student can study online through websites and softwares to review and enrich their knowledge after school, or they are able to learn with teachers through computers or smartphones rather than face to face.
On the other hand, the impact of new technologies in social lives can be extremely positive. In today’s world, social media plays an important role in the types of relationships . Interactions by email, phone or video can avoid the limitation of written letters or face-to-face meetings, and many of us take advantages from these interactions, either in work or in study. However, technology may not always be positive. It is evident that when people rely on it, their ability to communicate with each other reduces. Furthermore, when they use more 150 times per week, the rate of information overload or addition will increase and will be rejuvenated.
To sum up, technology has brought many positive developments in the ways people communicate with each other. Besides, there are some negative impacts of technology on people’s relationships.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 225, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...en to interact people in other countries with online meeting, especially in the p...
^^
Line 2, column 685, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...r smartphones rather than face to face. On the other hand, the impact of new tec...
^^^^
Line 3, column 178, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...rtant role in the types of relationships . Interactions by email, phone or video c...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, may, second, secondly, so, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1486.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 281.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28825622776 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91948870783 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612099644128 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 471.6 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5227893668 49.4020404114 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.0666666667 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7333333333 20.7667163134 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06120827912 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => 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: 0.387528557229 0.244688304435 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129722053522 0.084324248473 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.126054038172 0.0667982634062 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253637305098 0.151304729494 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.145024861209 0.056905535591 255% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => 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.