Many people think modern communication technology is having some negative effects on social relationships. Do you agree or disagree?
In this day and age, the significant development of numerous cutting edge technology have affected people’s lives irreversibly, especially the way people communicate. While some people claim that this revolution has a negative impact on social relationships, I strongly believe that the innovative communication technology is bringing more benefits rather than drawbacks.
To begin with, social media applications are considered an amazing tool connecting people all over the world. In this modern time, with the assistance of various kinds of these apps, people could find new friends even over a long distance. For example, Facebook, instagram, and zalo are becoming more and more popular over the time frame, also reaching hundreds of millions of hits every day. Furthermore, these apps cover almost every area in the world, even rural or urban. Hence people now only need a smartphone so that they can make friends easily with anyone. As a result, through conversation on the internet, people could understand national culture and become closer. In brief, innovative communication tools could enhance international relationships effectively.
On top of that, modern communication technology not only creates new friendships but also maintains current relationships. In this digital age, due to the convenience and practice of mobile phones, people can easily contact their family members, co-workers, and friends. People can not refuse the vitality of modern communication technology in daily life especially in quarantine time. To avoid epidemic spreading, people hardly have real conversations and as the result numerous children suffer from mental disease, for instance, depression. Therefore the young are encouraged to have more online conversations through the latest communication technology. Furthermore a huge number of companies allowed their employees to work from home. With the assistance of various kinds of communication tools, people not only could continue their work but also get along with their partners.
In conclusion, innovative modern communication technology has a pivotal role on social relationships as well as a vital element bringing people together.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 476, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...area in the world, even rural or urban. Hence people now only need a smartphone so th...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 543, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ntal disease, for instance, depression. Therefore the young are encouraged to have more o...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 657, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...gh the latest communication technology. Furthermore a huge number of companies allowed thei...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 882, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...but also get along with their partners. In conclusion, innovative modern communi...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, if, so, therefore, well, while, for example, for instance, in brief, in conclusion, as a result, as well as, to begin with, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => 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: 1866.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 325.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.74153846154 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24591054749 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11223734663 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.596923076923 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 593.1 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.5306350158 49.4020404114 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.764705882 106.682146367 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1176470588 20.7667163134 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.94117647059 7.06120827912 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.252921556311 0.244688304435 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0819960321175 0.084324248473 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0681118998145 0.0667982634062 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182372743861 0.151304729494 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578116001348 0.056905535591 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.01 12.4159519038 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.