Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more important to keep your old friends than it is to make new friends. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer
Friendship as a stronger form of interpersonal bond is very important. Many characteristics need for a permanent relationship between two people as a good friend. These characteristics include loyalty, sympathy, affection, honesty, love, and enjoyments of each other company. Definitely, some people if asked would agree with the statement hold old friend is valuable, while others would disagree. In my view keeping old friend would be far more beneficial for two main reasons.
The first and most exquisite point to be mentioned is that the old friend can help you in troublesome condition. Old friends have known each other for a long time and completely have informed of the weakness and strength of their personalities. This will be cause mutual understanding. Take myself, for example, my old friend Sara, who is I have known for roughly 20 years. We studied at the same schools. Whenever I get into trouble, she is the first for help. I remember when my grandmother passed away I was depressed and crying all the time, it was so hardship and nothing calmed me, in this situation she never leaves me alone. She advised me with the rational reason for moving forward and accepted this event that may happen for everyone.
Another reason is that the old friend is trusted each other because of the long lasting known duration. Trusty seems to be one of the most basic etiquettes that everyone should fully apply in their daily interaction with their friends. During their relationship, a friend passed many situations with each other and could gain mutual confiding. For instance, I totally trust my friend and many secrets are between us. I totally agree with this sentence a good friend sometimes better and closer than a member of your family. In many conditions may be not your family beside you but your old friend would care about what's happening in your life, a virtue which is hard to find in this materialistic life.
In conclusion, we should protect our relationship with our old friends due to reasons mentioned above.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-18 | m_elec | 60 | view |
| 2019-11-26 | JohnSmith96 | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-05 | Navis | 70 | view |
| 2019-10-23 | swapnil.paliwal | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-23 | swapnil.paliwal | 66 | view |
- Nowadays environmental problems are too big to be managed by individual persons or individual countries In other words it is an international problem To what extent do you agree or disagree 80
- Means of transportation 70
- TPO 33 Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement When teachers assign projects on which students must work together the students learn much more effectively than when they are asked to work alone on projects 90
- TPO 8 – Task 2: Do you agree or disagree with the statement?Television advertising directed toward young children ( aged two to five) should not be allowed 70
- TOP38Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Leadership comes naturally: one cannot learn to be a leader.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 255, Rule ID: BE_CAUSE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'because'?
Suggestion: because
...ength of their personalities. This will be cause mutual understanding. Take myself, for ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 615, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...ou but your old friend would care about whats happening in your life, a virtue which ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, so, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 9.8082437276 122% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 43.0 43.0788530466 100% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 52.1666666667 63% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1703.0 1977.66487455 86% => OK
No of words: 342.0 407.700716846 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97953216374 4.8611393121 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.48103885553 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75814080863 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 212.727598566 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.578947368421 0.524837075471 110% => OK
syllable_count: 508.5 618.680645161 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.4629606587 48.9658058833 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.15 100.406767564 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1 20.6045352989 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2 5.45110844103 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.067611006528 0.236089414692 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0227692581111 0.076458572812 30% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0251249293882 0.0737576698707 34% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0499340867458 0.150856017488 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0176451667077 0.0645574589148 27% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 11.7677419355 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 58.1214874552 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.1575268817 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 10.9000537634 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.01818996416 99% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 86.8835125448 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.