Technology has altered the means of communication between people. The communication mechanisms are evolved from ancient times letters to today's Facebook and WhatsApp groups. It has positively changed our social life, though, there are few drawbacks of this development.
Technology has bought people closer and made it easy to get in touch with your loved one. A student in the United States can instantly get in touch with his parents in the United Kingdom or a father living away from the family can easily attend his son's birthday virtually. Technology has eliminated the boundaries of meeting new people. People can make friends with someone from another continent without necessarily being there. Moreover, it is convenient to be in touch with them via group chats, video calls or even going through their social media posts. Furthermore, this development has helped us to run our daily routines in the crisis like COVID-19. Professionals, students can safely work from home or take online classes.
On the other hand, due to easy online interaction, people have less in-person interaction these days. A person who used to meet his parents twice a year now meets them only once a year, which can heartbreaking for the parents. The social network only shows the happy moments of one's life. If friends keep in touch only via social networks, they may not be there in each other's worst time.
In conclusion, this digital era has made it easy to build new relationships, but those relationships are not as strong as those made in person.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 272, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... are few drawbacks of this development. Technology has bought people closer and ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 279, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...network only shows the happy moments of ones life. If friends keep in touch only via...
^^^^
Line 3, column 371, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'others the worst'.
Suggestion: others the worst
...networks, they may not be there in each others worst time. In conclusion, this digital era...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, may, moreover, so, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1290.0 1615.20841683 80% => OK
No of words: 256.0 315.596192385 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0390625 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70993542358 2.80592935109 97% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.64453125 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 394.2 506.74238477 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.8094325633 49.4020404114 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.0 106.682146367 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0666666667 20.7667163134 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.86666666667 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => 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: 0.16397803729 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0538147232206 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0474806945866 0.0667982634062 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0830570677015 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0317367449619 0.056905535591 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.0946893788 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 50.2224549098 125% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.3001002004 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.58950901804 96% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 78.4519038076 78% => More difficult words wanted.
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: 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.