When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings.
Author’s claim “When old building stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic building” seems to be little general as historic buildings are the hallmark of our culture, however if modern planners assure to improve the life of people of nation by using ground on which old building stand then, according to me government should allow modern planners to make such change.
Consider an example where modern planner feels of constructing company that will contribute in economic growth of nation because of the location of historic buildings. According to me government should approve it because it will not only contribute in improving economic growth but will able provide jobs to thousands of unemployed people. One should not hold back such developments just to preserve historic buildings, as improving citizen’s living conditions should be the first priority of the government. Consider another example, if any state is not having local hospital or local hospital is far away from the accessibility of the people of state, then one should not deny using the land on which historic buildings are standing because building hospital will provide a great aid to people suffering from disease and have to travel long distance daily for their treatment. Preserving historic building hold no worth, if people health or living requirements are jeopardize.
However, In India, there are many historic building preserved and people enthusiastically work towards continuing preserving such historic hallmarks. In India, tourism is one of the important factors contributing towards economic growth. Every year, people from all over countries are coming to India and visiting such historic buildings like Taj mahal, Udaipur fort, Pink city Jaipur, Ajmer, and many more. India is known for its cultural diversity, where many people in group had been able to preserve their culture. If those historic buildings, which are preserved by people from many decades is eradicated because some modern planner feels it can be used for modern purpose is really valid? From many generations people have been to teach history through such historic building and if such buildings are removed then how future generations will able to believe that such buildings do existed and history related to those buildings, for them it will be another fictional story from past. Thus, government should consider all the factors while deciding to make modern developments over historic building preservation.
On wrapping up, if modern development assure to improve the current living standards of people then eschewing such development is not valid choice over preserving historic building but government should also check on the rate of developments so that in order to improve peoples’ lives, people of nation are left with no historic hallmark which teaches us many lessons that no book or professor can teach us.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 169, Rule ID: ACCORDING_TO_ME[1]
Message: This phrase can sound awkward in English. Consider using 'in my opinion' or 'I think'.
Suggestion: In my opinion; I think
... of the location of historic buildings. According to me government should approve it because it...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 973, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'jeopardized'.
Suggestion: jeopardized
...eople health or living requirements are jeopardize. However, In India, there are many h...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, really, so, then, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 33.0505617978 61% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2565.0 2235.4752809 115% => OK
No of words: 472.0 442.535393258 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4343220339 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6610686524 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78681434744 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.472457627119 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 788.4 704.065955056 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 6.24550561798 0% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 33.0 23.0359550562 143% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 124.078007885 60.3974514979 205% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 183.214285714 118.986275619 154% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.7142857143 23.4991977007 143% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.28571428571 5.21951772744 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.469502793399 0.243740707755 193% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.165081717624 0.0831039109588 199% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.173137323008 0.0758088955206 228% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.334735552055 0.150359130593 223% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.214054982168 0.0667264976115 321% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.0 14.1392134831 149% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.52 48.8420337079 60% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.3 12.1743820225 142% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.81 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 28.0 11.8971910112 235% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 15.2 11.2143820225 136% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
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.