The traditional that the family gets together to eat meals is disappearing. What are the reasons? What are the impacts?
It is true that family meals play a vital role in strengthening family ties and building better relationships between members. However, the traditional family mealtime is no longer a prevalent thing. The chief reasons that could explain this paradox are the hectic schedules of both parents and children and the differences between their eating habits. This changing pattern of behavior could lead to conflicts in family and some health consequences.
There are two main reasons that shed light on why families no longer share mealtime as they used to do in the past. First, both parents and children are inundated with their work and study. It can be seen that while parents usually go to work from early morning to late night, their children have to enrol in a multitude of extra classes. As a result, having time to have meals together is almost impossible for families. Second, family members have different eating habits. For instance, children are often too impatient to eat at the table but prefer having meals in front of the television whilst the opposite is true for parents. Thay do realize that their offsprings’ habits are harmful, however, instead of preventing them from watching TV while eating, they put up with it.
The consequences brought by the disappearance of family mealtime are serious. From the perspective of the family, no time for family meals could weaken family bonds. As parents and children have no shared time to talk, they could not deeply understand each other. Consequently, conflicts might occur and when these become more profound, divorces are probably inevitable. In terms of health, family meals were an opportunity to provide all the members with a healthy diet. Without this routine, children are sometimes left to have snacks or to eat junk food, leading to some health problems such as obesity, heart diseases and more severely, hyperactivity.
In conclusion, the phenomenon of disappearing family shared meals is due to the hectic pace of life facing members and the divergences between generations’ eating habits. This problem leads to family arguments and health issues.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-07-10 | trần ngọc tuấn | 78 | view |
| 2023-11-13 | Mayuresh0809 | 89 | view |
| 2023-08-31 | Afdalah Harris | 56 | view |
| 2022-03-05 | Lê Quỳnh Mai | 73 | view |
| 2022-01-13 | Huy Vu | 73 | view |
- Some people think that newly built houses should follow the style of old houses in local areas Others think that people should have freedom to build houses of their own style Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 67
- The traditional that the family gets together to eat meals is disappearing What are the reasons What are the impacts 73
- Some people say that economic growth is the only way to end hunger and poverty while others say that economic growth damaging environment Discuss both views and give your opinion 73
- Some people say that music is a good way of bringing people of different cultures and ages together To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 61
- Today different types of robots are developed which are good friends to us and help us both at home and work Is this a positive or negative development 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, however, if, second, so, then, while, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1790.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 345.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1884057971 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3097767484 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70665356759 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 176.041082164 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55652173913 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 541.8 506.74238477 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => 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: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.5557839559 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.2105263158 106.682146367 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1578947368 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.57894736842 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198382316432 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0677705126553 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0506098978918 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137980654081 0.151304729494 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0262986399249 0.056905535591 46% => 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: 12.1 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.58950901804 95% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 78.4519038076 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.