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.
The statement refutes that historic buildings should give way to the development of modern society. However, I don’t agree with such views and strongly recommend that city planners should balance the development of the society and the preservation of historical relics.
Admittedly, the area which is occupied by historic buildings in cities seems to be wasteful if it is not developed for commercial purpose, such as commercial buildings and factories. With such modern facilities, more job opportunities will be created to attract people to work, thereby improving their living standards. In this way, the long term prosperity of our society can be more achievable. Otherwise, our society may lose its impetus to be economically affluent. Also, it can benefit the preservation of historic relics, as a plentiful society are more likely to invest more funds in preserving precious ancient buildings.
While it is true that contemporary buildings are crucial to the development of our world, it is equally important to remember that historic buildings have their own merits. For example, many ancient buildings have been developed for the purpose of tourism, which is a good way to exploit the value of such buildings. The operation of historic buildings as public attractions enable them to be self-funded or even contribute to the fiscal revenue of some cities, as tourists tend to be generous when visiting the tourist attractions. However, if the historic buildings are demolished, it will certainly affect the tourism industry in some places. In short, some historic buildings also have the ability to make a contribution to the economic development of the society if they are properly explored.
Moreover, the educational value of historic buildings should not be underestimated. For example, many primary and second school teachers will organise regular visit to some historic buildings in order to inform them the knowledge of history. Students who have the opportunity to acquire such knowledge are able to develop their imagination from the structures of these buildings. Also, through learning the architectural styles of these buildings, professional architects could implement some sophisticated skills into the construction of modern buildings. Hence, if ancient architectures are destroyed indiscriminately, the educational value of historic buildings will diminish dramatically and people may not be able to acquire their historic knowledge and related architectural skills.
In conclusion, the extreme opinion that historic buildings should give way to modern buildings need to be seriously reconsidered when making the decision about whether to raze a historic building for commercial purpose, as historic relics have their own commercial and educational merits.
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'second', 'so', 'while', 'as to', 'for example', 'in conclusion', 'in short', 'such as', 'it is true']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.222222222222 0.240241500013 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.151709401709 0.157235817809 96% => OK
Adjectives: 0.145299145299 0.0880659088768 165% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0491452991453 0.0497285424764 99% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0384615384615 0.0444667217837 86% => OK
Prepositions: 0.108974358974 0.12292977631 89% => OK
Participles: 0.0320512820513 0.0406280797675 79% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.12226970191 2.79330140395 112% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0470085470085 0.030933414821 152% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0876068376068 0.0997080785238 88% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0277777777778 0.0249443105267 111% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0106837606838 0.0148568991511 72% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2793.0 2732.02544248 102% => OK
No of words: 422.0 452.878318584 93% => OK
Chars per words: 6.61848341232 6.0361032391 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.58838876751 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.45971563981 0.366273622748 126% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.39336492891 0.280924506359 140% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.298578199052 0.200843997647 149% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.199052132701 0.132149295362 151% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12226970191 2.79330140395 112% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 219.290929204 93% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485781990521 0.48968727796 99% => OK
Word variations: 53.5783177734 55.4138127331 97% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6194690265 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.4444444444 23.380412469 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.2650104397 59.4972553346 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 155.166666667 141.124799967 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4444444444 23.380412469 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.888888888889 0.674092028746 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.21349557522 0% => OK
Readability: 62.7809373354 51.4728631049 122% => OK
Elegance: 1.51785714286 1.64882698954 92% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.40493965018 0.391690518653 103% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.127325977847 0.123202303941 103% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0577787523284 0.077325440228 75% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.611735408878 0.547984918172 112% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.148268392357 0.149214159877 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.182475768 0.161403998019 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0641867271499 0.0892212321368 72% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.417269738886 0.385218514788 108% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.115777920562 0.0692045440612 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.289188655266 0.275328986314 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.019797562235 0.0653680567796 30% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.4325221239 125% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.30420353982 38% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88274336283 61% => OK
Positive topic words: 12.0 7.22455752212 166% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.66592920354 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.70907079646 74% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 13.5995575221 118% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.