Some people believe that traveling to and living in numerous places increases one’s ability
to relate and connect to other people. Others believe that this ability is better cultivated by
living in one place and developing a deep understanding of that community.
The statement compares two competing opinions and aims to figure out which style of living can better foster one's ability to connect and interact with others. I can partly agree with the both viewpoints. However, it wholely depends on different individual when it comes to the development of one's social abilities.
First of all, traveling to and living in diverse places can truly widen one's mind. As one lives in a same place for a long time, he/ she may forms a sterotype of things around. On this specific circumstance, it might not be easy for him/ her to understand the behavior and thoughts from people from other cultural backgrounds. Then, when exposed in a totally different country and culture, one may find it difficult to build connection with others. On the one hand, he/ she may feel it hard to know what foreigners are truly thinking about and what do they really mean. Are they really want to make friends with me or just being polite? On the other hand, lacking of understanding of other culture may cause their unconfidence, so that it would be even harder to relate to other people. One may argure that, people could still get to konw other countries and culture through reading books or surfing the Internet. However, the true understanding must be built on the basis of personal experience.
By comparison, always on the way seems cool, though, may cause lacking of long-term, deep connection with people. Since one's energy is limited, people are tend to decrease correspondence with former friends who are not with them at present. This would be the biggest drawback of "living on the way". After long-haul journey, one is likely to feel lonely even if they have met sort of people on the journey. But every person may just be a beautiful story for him/ her. In contrast, people with steady life style have less chance of losing their connection with long-term friends, who are highly regarded for one's life. Move back to the aforementioned situation, one may find it difficult to build connection with new, foreign people. However, it is personal preference whether to make foreign friends. For instance, residents in North Europe are thought be really shy and are not willing to make new friends after reaching their adulthood. Actually, most of their friends are from their childhood. However, they are recognized as the happiest residents in the whole as they have important, life-long friends, who can tackle most of their sadness and trouble, share happieness with. So, happieness is not related to the social ability.
To sum up, we cannot evaluate which kind of lifestyle is better for cultivating one's ability of making friends, I propose that one should experience the both and choose the suitable one.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 121, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...erm, deep connection with people. Since ones energy is limited, people are tend to d...
^^^^
Line 5, column 618, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...rm friends, who are highly regarded for ones life. Move back to the aforementioned s...
^^^^
Line 7, column 81, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
... of lifestyle is better for cultivating ones ability of making friends, I propose th...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, may, really, so, still, then, for instance, in contrast, kind of, sort of, first of all, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 58.6224719101 123% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2292.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 463.0 442.535393258 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95032397408 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63868890866 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.630751115 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 215.323595506 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533477321814 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 698.4 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.9344663167 60.3974514979 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.68 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.52 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.08 5.21951772744 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 10.2758426966 175% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264013476397 0.243740707755 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0686408482177 0.0831039109588 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.062422118852 0.0758088955206 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170825127862 0.150359130593 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0580804882863 0.0667264976115 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.1392134831 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 100.480337079 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.