Governments should spend money on railways rather than roads.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
It is suggested that instead of focusing on roads, the authorities should invest more money in developing the railway network. Personally, I strongly agree with this suggestion.
One of the main reasons why the construction of railways should be supported is that railways are safer than roads. For instance, the number of casualties caused by road accidents has been reported to be larger than that caused by trains. This is mainly due to the fact that operations of trains on railways are strictly regulated both by advanced computer systems and professional staff. In contrast, travelling on roads has a higher risk of accidents for the reason that car drivers and motorbike riders fail to abide by traffic laws and drive recklessly.
In addition, travelling by trains has been proven to be faster than by road vehicles. This could be explained by the fact that while a train is on the move, it could be given priority over other vehicles as the railway barriers can be put in place to keep other vehicles out of its track. On the other hand, drivers travelling on roads may get stuck in traffic jams and lose up to an hour waiting, which is especially true during peak hours. The result of this distinction is quite significant for workers, as illustrated in Vietnam, where commuters using trains are often on time whilst car drivers tend to arrive at work late.
To sum up, I strongly support the view that investment in developing railways should be prioritized over that in improving roads.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 77, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...truction of railways should be supported is that railways are safer than roads. F...
^^
Line 3, column 166, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ance, the number of casualties caused by road accidents has been reported to be l...
^^
Line 5, column 630, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ar drivers tend to arrive at work late. To sum up, I strongly support the view t...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 131, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ioritized over that in improving roads.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, may, so, while, for instance, in addition, in contrast, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1255.0 1615.20841683 78% => OK
No of words: 256.0 315.596192385 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90234375 5.12529762239 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68126718653 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 176.041082164 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.57421875 0.561755894193 102% => OK
syllable_count: 369.0 506.74238477 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.60771543086 87% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => 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: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.5724002532 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.090909091 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2727272727 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06120827912 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.167543087188 0.244688304435 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0752846978586 0.084324248473 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0666665752262 0.0667982634062 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128827216544 0.151304729494 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.071705390043 0.056905535591 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.0946893788 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 50.2224549098 130% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.44 12.4159519038 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 78.4519038076 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.