Many people think modern communication technology is having some negative effects on social relationships. Do you agree or disagree?
By all accounts, harnessing cutting-edge technology in daily conversations is detrimental to social relationships. From my perspective, while I agree with this statement, I do argue that the considerable advantages of communication technology cannot be overlooked.
On the one hand, the advent of modern technological advances in daily communications might lead to a deterioration in relationships among people. This is because modern technology utilised in daily communications might facilitate users to downplay the importance of a face-to-face conversation, which, in turn, could induce a lack of genuine understanding of each other. For instance, people these days are inclined to depend excessively on Facebook and other online platforms to deliver daily conversations with their mates without heading out for a one-to-one interaction, which unintentionally perpetuates an invisible distance between them. As a result, some might experience a sense of loneliness stemming from the lack of direct interaction with their friends.
On the other hand, state-to-the-art communication technology might bring about several benefits that humankind can take advantage of. One of the most irrefutable advantages is to aid people to stay in touch with their relatives regardless of distance. Take overseas tertiary students as a prime example, international students could call home by using a tablet or a smartphone with an internet connection though they are a thousand-mile far from their home. In tandem with this, what people might benefit from modern communication technology is less time-consuming. To be more specific, users will steer clear of commuting to an appointment place in light of making use of an online conversation, which possibly provides them with more time to complete other essential tasks.
In conclusion, communication technology is likely to become increasingly prevalent in society in the future. While I agree that this trend might cause adverse impacts on social relationships, I do assume that this tendency could bring about benefits to human.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, so, while, for instance, in conclusion, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 41.998997996 148% => 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: 1770.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 310.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.70967741935 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.48287918978 2.80592935109 124% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587096774194 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 564.3 506.74238477 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => 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: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 50.7004195681 49.4020404114 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.153846154 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8461538462 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15384615385 7.06120827912 87% => 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 : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.180136204792 0.244688304435 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0736170506106 0.084324248473 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0519920455134 0.0667982634062 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122668929129 0.151304729494 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0292331203028 0.056905535591 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 13.0946893788 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 12.4159519038 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.