With an increasing population communicating via the internet and text message, face-to-face communication will become a thing of the past.
To what extent do you agree?
In recent years, society has witnessed noticeable changes regarding the medium people use for interaction. By virtue of the technological advancements, the prevalence of Internet and text messaging has also increased at a stratospherically high level. As a result, stances are indicating that face-to-face communication will soon die out. However, I am in favor of the opinion that text messaging will not replace the traditional way, of which the reasons will be elucidated further in this essay.
To begin with, it is undeniable that technology plays a pivotal role in making exchanging information easier. One prominent justification for this is that there are a host of applications created to cultivate the communicating experience, namely Messenger or Telegram. With an engaging interface as well as several add-ons that may help users expressing their true emotions like stickers or emojis, it is possible that those applications can slowly become a ubiquitous method of chatting.
Turning to the other side of the argument, however, through face-to-face conversations, individuals could present a more sincere self than it is online. As can be seen in many articles in newspapers, some dating-apps users got cheated by the person they talked to on those platforms courtesy of the rather low security and uncertainty lurking beneath this type of making acquaintances. Another example worth mentioning is that when interacting directly with one's loved one, they may witness verbal and non-verbal language like hugging or holding hands, adding in the variety of expressing which the online experience may lack. By shedding light on this example, it is crystal clear that face-to-face conversations may contain more realness and certainty, as well as better at bolstering relationships. Moreover, it is prospective that some individuals ought not to achieve the way of using technological gadgets on a throughout scale like the elderly. Therefore, real-life chats may remain the major medium of interaction.
In conclusion, notwithstanding chatting via applications being ubiquitous courtesy of the development of technology, face-to-face communication seems to last with time due to its realness and straightforward interactions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 168, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'hosts'?
Suggestion: hosts
...tification for this is that there are a host of applications created to cultivate th...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, therefore, well, in conclusion, as a result, 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: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1908.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 338.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6449704142 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38936543416 2.80592935109 121% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 176.041082164 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627218934911 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 598.5 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.4332422987 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.285714286 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1428571429 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06120827912 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239908270913 0.244688304435 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.075349092525 0.084324248473 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0767861510421 0.0667982634062 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152405103625 0.151304729494 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0698981053937 0.056905535591 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.73 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.25 8.58950901804 119% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 78.4519038076 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.