In the past most families ate together in the evening, and the food was almost always cooked at home. Nowadays, however, many families rarely eat together every day and often the food is bought outside the house, or supplied by catering.
What are the reason for this? In your opinion is it a negative development?
Development of countries in this current time is changing social interactions. The Most impact appears in family behaviour, especially in families eating habits. Most families in the past always cooked together compared with today, a lot of people like to buy food from the outside or supplied by catering more.
According to the situation above, I think there are several reasons why it happens. Firstly is parent working time means they have much time to be at home, including to cook together with their family. Most parents in the past prefer to work as a farmer. They worked on the day along and when night appeared, they will have a quality of time with their own family. Secondly because by buying food from a restaurant is more simple and does not waste much time. To prepared lunch and dinner, at least have to spare one up to two hours before it served, and of course for parents who have overworked on their office did not have it. Not only about the time, buying food in a restaurant or supplied by catering served the variety of foods. It will make them not bored with just one kind of foods.
On the other hand, there are negative points from this habit. Firstly, the food is not healthy. Sometimes to make it easier, the parent usually buy fast food, such as hamburger, pizza, or sandwich. So it still continues, it has a bad impact on health. Secondly is family interaction. Families in the past who cooked together had good communication development. So, that family also could give attention to their children.
In conclusion, I suggest parents who work long hours still have to care about healthy aspect of the food and also family interaction.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 362, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[4]
Message: “So , that” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...her had good communication development. So, that family also could give attention to the...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, second, secondly, so, still, at least, i think, in conclusion, kind of, of course, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1384.0 1615.20841683 86% => OK
No of words: 291.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.7560137457 5.12529762239 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4788949853 2.80592935109 88% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.560137457045 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 429.3 506.74238477 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.2975951904 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.7585518721 49.4020404114 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 72.8421052632 106.682146367 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.3157894737 20.7667163134 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.89473684211 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 3.4128256513 264% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241347135029 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0762758474556 0.084324248473 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0788093796835 0.0667982634062 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166364243358 0.151304729494 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0850818618517 0.056905535591 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.6 13.0946893788 66% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 50.2224549098 129% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.3001002004 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.74 12.4159519038 78% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.58950901804 89% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 78.4519038076 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 9.78957915832 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.1190380762 79% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.7795591182 74% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.