It is important to preserve the beautiful buildings of the past, even if it will be expensive to do so. To what extent do you agree or disagree with it.
Recently, the phenomenon of protecting of ancient buildings and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although this protection of these amazing promises is highly beneficial as it regarded by a substantial number of individuals both constructive and positive, others hold opponents views. I am inclined to believe that respecting the worth ancient buildings can be a plus as it could develop brilliant aspects for its adherents.
From a social standpoint, the protection of old features like different types of houses, mosques and churches can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact of history, culture and tradition. These places play a pivotal role in protecting the national identity of each nation. An array of stories which were hidden in them about the past. Another crucial feature is the economy. According to my experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the effects of historical, traditional or cultural places on fostering the tourism industry.
On the one hand, there is no doubt the conservation of the fascinating historical buildings has some demerits as well. One of the most significant ones is their expenditures. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious world-renowned university has asserted that there is a great deal amount of time and money is spent annually in order to repair and reserve these premises. Their opponents argued that the society have other priorities to cost including developing the transportation system, educational system and health. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of their allocated budgets.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of maintaining the old and interesting building far more outweigh its drawbacks.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, so, well, while, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 20.9802955665 110% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1618.0 1207.87684729 134% => OK
No of words: 294.0 242.827586207 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50340136054 5.00649968141 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12055134784 2.71678728327 115% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 139.433497537 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.639455782313 0.580463131201 110% => OK
syllable_count: 510.3 379.143842365 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 12.6551724138 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.9282065824 50.4703680194 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.571428571 104.977214359 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 20.9669160288 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.57142857143 7.25397266985 35% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0705097122826 0.242375264174 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0219657432948 0.0925447433944 24% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0292629924412 0.071462118173 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0426619915856 0.151781067708 28% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0264466084653 0.0609392437508 43% => 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: 15.0 12.6369458128 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 53.1260098522 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.9458128079 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.62 11.5310837438 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.53 8.32886699507 126% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.94827586207 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.1111111111 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 10.0 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.