Some people believe that government should spend money on building train and subway lines to reduce traffic congestion. Others think that building more and wider roads is the better way to reduce traffic congestion. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
With the aim of relieving effectively traffic congestion, people consider different practical suggestion that government plan to construct whether building train and subway lines or more and wider roads. This essay will state some plausible reasons behind this debatable notion and present my opinion to conclude.
On the one hand, the advocates of railway improvements point out that the building train would be reliable infrastructures to reduce traffic jam. This is based on the fact that traffic jam is often on account of road-user tendency to hire their vehicle and such this facility could thus encourage people to reduce the use of private vehicle. In addition, it is often said that the underground tracks of railway would not take up vast surface area. Hence, train journey would not obstruct other traffics or activities in the surface, as it is widely known that traffic congestion is due to not only waiting time of traffic light but also human activity surrounding the roadways.
On the other hand, the supporters of broad-road development point out that widening the road space is more effective way to reduce road congestion. To clarify, it is known that high density of vehicle often causes traffic jam because the roadway space is insufficient with the area vehicles use. As a result, with wider roads, the capability of the roadways to accommodate vehicle traversing will increase. Furthermore, there would be tendency, often generate traffic volume, among driver to travel in the same way when going to same destination. Thus, the authority, on behalf of employing more reliable method to relieve traffic congestion, should construct more alternative roads as necessary in order to encourage road users to spread into different direction.
Overall, it is logical to conclude that railway improvements could decrease the traffic volume by reducing the use of private vehicle and avoiding human activity in the surface. Indeed, this is provided that there are limited spaces for constructing more and wider roads.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, if, so, thus, in addition, as a result, in the same way, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1713.0 1615.20841683 106% => OK
No of words: 324.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28703703704 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74013416433 2.80592935109 98% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.552469135802 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 538.2 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.5686223339 49.4020404114 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.769230769 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9230769231 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.07692307692 7.06120827912 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More 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: 0.315001745721 0.244688304435 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104915730928 0.084324248473 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0833890048356 0.0667982634062 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185650603321 0.151304729494 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0487629334482 0.056905535591 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.