It is important to have huge public spaces like parks and squares in towns and cities. Do you agree or disagree with the given statement?
There has been some discussion about the existence and the need of green or leisure spaces in urban areas. While many people believe that these open premises are essential, others insist that they can be useless, hence, must be converted to practical purposes. In my opinion, despite the voices against the parks and public places existence, I still believe in the great value of those to both cities and civilians.
From my standpoint, I still harbor a concern that public spaces such as squares have positive effects on our daily life. First of all, these places are always considered as the heart of cities where people can organize family meetings and do many outdoor activities in their leisure time. Beside that the creation of parks or squares comes from opinions that can provide ideal places for children and their parents to have a quality time after a hectic daily schedule. The increasing pollution of cities is a cause of great concern for the government and theirs citizens, therefore, places like parks and squares often provide relaxation to the old people. Moreover, those public spaces also abstract tourists because of the historical value behind their creations, so the government can afford a new way of industry. For instance, the Unification Park which is a symbol of peace, stability, and postwar development of Hanoi. As a result, it is absolutely imperative to conserve historical places for the future generations.
On the other hand, due to globalization and urbanization, cities are getting crowded and lacking places to build public and commercial centres. In detaily described, a new transportation system coming to the areas requires a large space to build and operate. Take one example, New York was planned nearly 200 years ago and the roads in the city were small and narrow which were built only for carts not cars or even buses. Later, NY authorities converted many historical parks and gardens into parking stations and highways. Consequently, this transformation was publicly criticized by civilians and other town planners. Therefore, destroying parks and other public spaces for current benefits is not the solution for space management in cities .
To conclude, big public grounds have many benefits to our daily life, especially for the future generations. Cities are facing a lot of pressure to develop a substantial infrastructure for the growing population, but this cannot be allowed at the cost of parks and squares, consequently, it is completely indispensable to have huge public grounds in every city.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-12-04 | Hoangquan0912 | 78 | view |
| 2020-12-02 | Hoangquan0912 | 78 | view |
| 2020-12-02 | Hoangquan0912 | 78 | view |
| 2020-11-18 | code6127 | 67 | view |
- Some people think that robot technology is very important for our future Some others believe that robots are dangerous invention and have negative effects on society Discuss both views and give opinion 78
- all towns and cities should have large public spaces 78
- It is important to have huge public spaces like parks and squares in towns and cities Do you agree or disagree with the given statement 78
- the paragraph shows estimated oil production capacity for several Gulf countries between 1990 and 2010 78
- Wild animals have no place in the 21st century so protecting them is a waste of resources To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 745, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... solution for space management in cities . To conclude, big public grounds have ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, if, moreover, so, still, therefore, while, for instance, such as, as a result, first of all, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 10.4138276553 221% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2144.0 1615.20841683 133% => OK
No of words: 413.0 315.596192385 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19128329298 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80418866342 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 176.041082164 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56416464891 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 681.3 506.74238477 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
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: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.5656978258 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.111111111 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9444444444 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.11111111111 7.06120827912 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.235391667605 0.244688304435 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722033427298 0.084324248473 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0462125715622 0.0667982634062 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136432736079 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375603662599 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.12 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 78.4519038076 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.