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.
The old buildings represent true history of the nation. The prompt claims that historic construction could be destroyed in order to build new modern one. I strongly disagree with this statement for two reasons, which I would explain below.
To begin with, old construction shows past life style better that anything. For example pyramids which locate in Egypt, serve the purpose of the museum for hundreds year. Scientists know about Egyptians life style a lot, mostly because of the pyramids and their virgin condition. In addition the constructions of the old Rim tell us about traditions and how first Olympics games were established. Therefore if modern planners decide to destroy old buildings and build new ones, people's recent history would be wasted.
Secondly, old constructions have proved their strengh towards the environmental disasters such as earthquake, tornado and so on. For example when new houses were constructed on the place of old ones in 2015. The earthquake that passed through capital city of the Kazakhstan in 2016, ruined mostly new constructions when old ones were not hurt a lot. In addition, according to the data in national newspaper of the Azerbaijan, most of the recently constructed buildings were decreased in persistence towards the wild wind. Accordingly, it doesn't mean that new buildings are better than old ones.
Of course, some may argue that modern buildings serve purpose to increase life conditions. However in today's life it does not seem reliable enough for destroying old constructions which represent history of last decades.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The old buildings represent true history...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reasons, which I would explain below. To begin with, old construction shows pa...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 289, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: addition,
...pyramids and their virgin condition. In addition the constructions of the old Rim tell u...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 403, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
... first Olympics games were established. Therefore if modern planners decide to destroy ol...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eoples recent history would be wasted. Secondly, old constructions have proved ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 543, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... towards the wild wind. Accordingly, it doesnt mean that new buildings are better than...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...w buildings are better than old ones. Of course, some may argue that modern bu...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 97, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ve purpose to increase life conditions. However in todays life it does not seem reliabl...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, in addition, of course, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.5258426966 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 14.8657303371 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 33.0505617978 39% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 58.6224719101 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1329.0 2235.4752809 59% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 251.0 442.535393258 57% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29482071713 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 4.55969084622 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80975654277 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 215.323595506 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.601593625498 0.4932671777 122% => OK
syllable_count: 389.7 704.065955056 55% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.5780699543 60.3974514979 49% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 88.6 118.986275619 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7333333333 23.4991977007 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 5.21951772744 166% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 7.80617977528 102% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 10.2758426966 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264037428608 0.243740707755 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0962817348584 0.0831039109588 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0901287540161 0.0758088955206 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179445034647 0.150359130593 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0550577671691 0.0667264976115 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.8420337079 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 100.480337079 67% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 11.8971910112 50% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.