With the development of technology and science, some people believe that there is no great value of artists such as musicians and painters. What are the things artists can do but the scientist cannot? Why should we encourage the art area?
Recently, the phenomenon of technology development and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of space technologies is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that information technology can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, the value of musicians and painters can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of learning music, as well as the exciting painting, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the value of learning the art. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both the knowledge of music and contemporary art apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, science development might increase the consequences of international science. Moreover, fundamental aspects of science fields could relate to this reality that demerits of the science technology pertain to the knowledgable scientist. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of the science information is correlated negatively with professional artists. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of the scientist research.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of encouraging the art area far outweigh drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of are works prove the significance of the indigenous art, but also pinpoint the art technology implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 20.9802955665 81% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.75862068966 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1494.0 1207.87684729 124% => OK
No of words: 265.0 242.827586207 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63773584906 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.31786752705 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 139.433497537 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.633962264151 0.580463131201 109% => OK
syllable_count: 473.4 379.143842365 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.4615890439 50.4703680194 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.5 104.977214359 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0833333333 20.9669160288 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233150115946 0.242375264174 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0704491513184 0.0925447433944 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0258954713442 0.071462118173 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11899129024 0.151781067708 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0185533244383 0.0609392437508 30% => 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: 16.2 12.6369458128 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.43 11.5310837438 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.51 8.32886699507 126% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 55.0591133005 176% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.