Many old buildings are protected by law because they are part of nation's history.
However, some people think old buildings should be knocked down to make way for new ones because people need houses and offices. How important is to maintain old buildings? Should history stand in the way of progress?
Although the government in almost every nation contributes the immense efforts in protecting the old buildings because of the historical aspects, there are several citizens suggest that the authority should reconstruct the old buildings to make room for newer areas. Personally, the preservation of historical places are important, however, historical should not be the obstacle of development. In this essay, information and evidence are given to clarify my point of views.
Firstly, the importance of maintaining old buildings should be recognized carefully, but the need for constructing new places for citizens should receive more attention from authority. In detail, on the one hand, old buildings present as the visible evidence when teaching younger generation about historical moments. For example, although being destroyed dramatically in the World War II, Sanna Shrine gate still receives protection from Japanese authority until now, as the government wants to warn citizens about the effects of wars. However, the safety and expenses to preserver old buildings have to be taken into consideration to guarantee the historical values will not become the burden to our society.
Secondly, due to the overpopulation, the demand for houses and working areas keeps growing intensively. As a result, constructing new places for inhabitants has a likelihood of becoming an inevitable tendency. Obviously, the land fund is limited, therefore, the deconstruction old buildings to create the newer ones is unquestionable. Although the preservation of historical places is highly prioritized in majority of countries, the development of industrialization and modernization are essential. For example, several years ago in Vietnam, because of the beauty and historical meaning of the old bridge called “Long Bien” in Hanoi city, most people voted to keep it instead of replacing by a new one. Eventually, as the small size of the old bridge, which was built long time ago, could not afford the enormous number of vehicle. Consequently, people normally suffered from traffic jam when driving through this place.
To conclude, I believe the old constructions play a crucial role in our life, however the preservation of these historical evidence should be conducted efficiently to avoid conflicting with the human needs.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, for example, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 24.0651302605 37% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.3376753507 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1980.0 1615.20841683 123% => OK
No of words: 353.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.60906515581 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17729851706 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.592067988669 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 620.1 506.74238477 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 7.0 2.10420841683 333% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.8885620905 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.0 106.682146367 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5333333333 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.46666666667 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.358952090912 0.244688304435 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108395663673 0.084324248473 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0937649828972 0.0667982634062 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207594372172 0.151304729494 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0767853411507 0.056905535591 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.55 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.74 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 78.4519038076 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => 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.