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.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
To me, modern development should not be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings or structures. The historical context associated with those structures is way more valuable for us and generations to come. If we start replacing all the old buildings with modern infrastructure then knowledge and key information linked to those buildings, and to civilizations which constructed them, will be lost forever. This will be a huge loss as there is always so much to learn from the past.
To start with, we can take the example of Egyptian pyramids. They are centuries-old structures build by ancient Arab civilizations. Historians of current times are still figuring out how those were built in those times. Did they - people of those times - had such sophisticated construction machinery which could move those rocks and put them in such symmetrical fashion? They either had cranes similar to current times which could do such a task and any equivalent tool or technique through which they could accomplish so much. For geological scientists, these monumental structures are just like a feast. They get tremendous learning opportunities on these sites. Image the situation where these are demolished and new commercial or residential buildings are constructed, we shall lose everything thing associated with them.
Additionally, taking Collosium as an example, Romans had this huge structure built for public events. They used to have gladiators fight in the arena and people used to come, witness their bravery and applaud their fighting skills. Criminals and slaves were also kept in the underground, so-called, jails. We could know so much about those times and their way of living through this building. Though people interested in history and historical events can learn through reading books written about these civilizations, personally able to witness the same live is definitely icing on the cake.
On the contrary, these are instances, where old and ancient buildings are deteriorating and their maintenance has to be carried out so they retain their charisma and elegance. Modern techniques should be applied to keep those buildings in the same state. People visiting them should not get the feeling that something has been changed. Of course, who are in the field of studying these old buildings will obviously come to know about the changes or maintenance activity carried out, however, for the general public, it's still an asset to be preserved for generations to come.
Conclusively, preservation of historic buildings deserves a higher priority than the development of new infrastructure. Demolishing any structure will take away some link or knowledge about the era when that was constructed. This goes without saying, knowledge about nations, civilizations, and cultures is always a vital piece of information and every effort should be made to retain that knowledge.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 501, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... activity carried out, however, for the general public, its still an asset to be preserved for...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, still, then, as to, of course, on the contrary, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2455.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 456.0 442.535393258 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38377192982 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99509285743 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 215.323595506 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543859649123 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 745.2 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.5374262273 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.291666667 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.21951772744 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.253164176336 0.243740707755 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0742837900961 0.0831039109588 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0969492088555 0.0758088955206 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152704732207 0.150359130593 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0990161492702 0.0667264976115 148% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.1392134831 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 100.480337079 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.