In recent years, the communication system has totally changed and enhanced to make people use it efficiently. It is argued that Advances in technology build communication between people better but that fact is creating a connection among people is not emotionally convenient. In this essay, I partially agree that communication has made inevitable whilst this would not be the better option than directly connect to the people.
To begin with, technologies have made remarkable achievements, thereby people intend to use them very efficiently than before. Before 20 years, anybody wants to communicate with others, used a pager to pass the message through the air. The development of communication changed the way how we were having a connection with people. To exemplify, email is one of the best and popular communication mechanisms in the 1990s. After some years, the implication of communication evolution, Microsoft invented messaging application outlook and through this, we could easily build conversation throughout the organization. So the cost and consent from appropriate companies are getting reduced.
Now most of the people having communication through social applications. But this would not give the contentment to the people to have a connection directly. As a matter of fact, digital communication relies on the network. if the network has deficiency due to network traffic we would find network lost and not even have a text connection with them. But face to face and verbal interaction with people would be easy and understand each other.
To conclude, Digital communication technologies occupied people to make use more redundantly. So, promptly everyone has to admit that communication makes people communicate through the air. But it never conveys feelings of people making at the other end. And also, face to face reaction and verbal urgency wouldn't get through this. Moreover, as communication technologies have grown greatly in the decade, so most people tend to use social applications like Facebook, Whatsapp et cetera connecting people where ever they are.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 225, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...al communication relies on the network. if the network has deficiency due to netwo...
^^
Line 7, column 307, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...ace to face reaction and verbal urgency wouldnt get through this. Moreover, as communic...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, moreover, so, as to, as a matter of fact, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 8.3376753507 288% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1771.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 324.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46604938272 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11575411673 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558641975309 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.2739508236 49.4020404114 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.2105263158 106.682146367 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0526315789 20.7667163134 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 7.06120827912 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21534747686 0.244688304435 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0788506684386 0.084324248473 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0495752362479 0.0667982634062 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144888050871 0.151304729494 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0190661374741 0.056905535591 34% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.