In this modern era, it is acknowledged by health professionals that taking up an exercise as walking could be advantageous for human health. However, the number of pedestrians has reduced recently, compared with that in the past. From my point of view, this phenomenon is attributed to its inconvenience as well as the lack of walkway, and there are two approaches that can spur people to walk more frequently.
To begin with, there are two reasons that could act as a precursor to the decline of walkers. First and foremost, due to the convenience and the speed of motor vehicles, people tend to choose motorbikes or cars as means of transport to their workplace rather than have a walk. For instance, a transport would take humans at least 10 minutes to reach their firm, compared to roughly 45 minutes of walking. Furthermore, pavements or walkways have been minimized in order to enlarge roads for transportation as well as construction, along with the destruction of parks, has resulted in the lack of pathways for pedestrians. Take Vietnam as an example, in 2015, the proportion of people taking walking as exercises was 30%, while this figure in 2018 had reduced to 15%, due to the diminished pathway to construct buildings.
There are several feasible solutions that can encourage people to take up walking more. Firstly, the authority should raise awareness of residents about the merits of walking, as well as establish some competitions to stimulate people to engage in. In Japan, the government has held a great number of walking competitions with enchanting rewards, which encourage numerous people to take part in this sort of tournaments, raising the number of pedestrians by 20%. Additionally, pathways for walkers should be enlarged through constructing more parks, as well as pavements so that they would have places to take a walk. If the number of walkways continues to be lessened, then citizens would not obtain opportunities to walk due to the lack of pathways, leading to the reduction of pedestrians.
In conclusion, the phenomenon of the increasing number of people who tend to not walk is attributable to the lack of walkways, as well as the inconvenience of that. And in order to raise that figure, people should perceive the beneficial outcomes of walking, as well as more pathways should be constructed.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, so, then, well, while, at least, for instance, in conclusion, sort of, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 41.998997996 171% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1958.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 387.0 315.596192385 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05943152455 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43534841618 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00077108853 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.498708010336 0.561755894193 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 585.0 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 40.6543150641 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.533333333 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.53333333333 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.327241719875 0.244688304435 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116597422599 0.084324248473 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0895536743531 0.0667982634062 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22074966103 0.151304729494 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0736159709471 0.056905535591 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 50.2224549098 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, so, then, well, while, at least, for instance, in conclusion, sort of, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 41.998997996 171% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1958.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 387.0 315.596192385 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05943152455 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43534841618 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00077108853 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.498708010336 0.561755894193 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 585.0 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 40.6543150641 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.533333333 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.53333333333 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.327241719875 0.244688304435 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116597422599 0.084324248473 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0895536743531 0.0667982634062 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22074966103 0.151304729494 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0736159709471 0.056905535591 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 50.2224549098 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.