Love and Money
From ancient time to nowadays the institution of the marriage had been playing the cruel role of the unit of society – in case of the well-being part of society it was amalgamating wealth of two families and controversially in case of lower society it was attempt to create some wealth and join the different skills together for surviving. There had been lasting until the 20th century or more precisely until the middle of the 20th century when the level of life in the developed countries or counties in the stage of transgression changed dramatically in the better way. There was no more a high need to be in the marriage for aims mentioned above. As well women had been able to create the right of voices for themselves. One might claim that it was high time to put the love as a base for building the marriage.
Indeed, the briefest reflection on the last 50 years reveals such events as the movement of hippies who were in the support of the free love and no duties, no marriage, and the dissolution of the institution of the marriage in all levels of society. Being freer, people all over the world started practicing the love as the main engine in decision making. There should be asked the question whether it made them happier or not, what it gave them. According to the path-breaking work and cutting-edge researches based on the data from mentioned above period, the love is no more than the process of creating hormones in a brain and depending on the individual dispositions of human being this process lasts approximately 3 years. Presumably there will be huge love and seemingly endless sense of happiness, however after all nobody knows what will be left then. What about the wealth and the ways of building units of society that had been used for the long time and can be said have already approved their resistance to the great deals of obstacles? Let’s take a closer look at it.
Undoubtedly, the wealth gives the access to benefits of the life – from health and opportunity to last your years, reach the longevity, to creating a better future for your children, your future generation. And here there are even no talks concerning more mundane necessities such as buying high-level goods (food, clothes and etc.), traveling, living not in slums, but in the smart dwellings and houses with spectaculars views. There a saying in Russian language: “there is no need to drink water from a face”, which means that the appearance should play the latest role in the process of looking for the partner of your life. Since in the majority cases the appearance is closely connected with the love between people, there is possibility for further developing this idea – the core role of the piece definitely must not be given to the love. Moving to the main idea, one might say anything, however being in the harmony with yourself and your life is more than just prominent, it is all. While the love and wealth are powerful in the marriage, so are the esteem, credence, supportiveness, mutual assistance. However, meanwhile ones of them are lifelong partners in your unit, the others are vulnerable to the deterioration and vanishing.
So, in conclusion, never in the recorded history has the humanity have as much freedom in personal decision-making process as it has today. Constraining yourself in looking for a soulmate by just love and money is the most unreasonable and incorrect approach which is likely to lead to destroying rather than ameliorating and strengthening the private life ad marriage. Balancing own life and getting rid of obsession about either a future partner's money or his/her pretty face might be an alternative solution.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 373, Rule ID: ASK_THE_QUESTION[1]
Message: Use simply 'asked' instead.
Suggestion: asked
...ine in decision making. There should be asked the question whether it made them happier or not, wh...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 379, Rule ID: WHETHER[5]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "the question"?
Suggestion: whether
... decision making. There should be asked the question whether it made them happier or not, what it ga...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 303, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'goods'' or 'good's'?
Suggestion: goods'; good's
...e necessities such as buying high-level goods food, clothes and etc., traveling, livi...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 323, Rule ID: AND_ETC[1]
Message: Use simply 'etc.'.
Suggestion: etc.
...s buying high-level goods food, clothes and etc., traveling, living not in slums, but in...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 513, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... face might be an alternative solution.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, so, then, well, while, after all, as to, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 7.48453608247 441% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 4.92783505155 223% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 25.0 5.05154639175 495% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.03092783505 231% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 28.0 32.9175257732 85% => OK
Preposition: 90.0 26.3917525773 341% => Less preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 13.0 3.85567010309 337% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3056.0 937.175257732 326% => Less number of characters wanted.
No of words: 628.0 206.0 305% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86624203822 4.54256449028 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.00598923014 3.78020617076 132% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76445962307 2.54303337028 109% => OK
Unique words: 322.0 127.690721649 252% => Less unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.512738853503 0.622605031667 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 950.4 290.88556701 327% => syllable counts are too long.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.41237113402 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 9.13402061856 22% => OK
Article: 4.0 0.824742268041 485% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 1.83505154639 163% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.463917525773 647% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 1.44329896907 346% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 12.6804123711 173% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 16.3608247423 171% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 75.1186389477 44.8134815571 168% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.909090909 76.5299724578 182% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.5454545455 16.8248392259 170% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.95454545455 4.34317383033 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.29896907216 93% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 2.54639175258 196% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 7.41237113402 256% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.49484536082 134% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.94845360825 25% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.17046333507 0.216113520407 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0488595419737 0.0766984524023 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0647007100098 0.0603063233224 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107926235583 0.12726935374 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0592532045945 0.0580467560999 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 8.37731958763 189% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 70.7449484536 73% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 3.82989690722 230% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 7.45979381443 174% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 8.71597938144 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 7.59969072165 114% => OK
difficult_words: 145.0 41.2886597938 351% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 28.5 8.62886597938 330% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 13.2 8.54432989691 154% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 8.15463917526 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.