More and more people in the city live in homes with small spaces or no outdoor areas. Do you think it is a negative or positive development?
As a result of urbanization with overpopulation issues, numerous tiny accommodations without open surroundings have emerged rapidly. This has sparked off a tremendous quantity of residential areas in the metropolis zone. In my point of view, this development includes both dark and bright impacts on citizens.
There is no doubt that one of the positive aspects of this trend is its full adaption satisfying a range of users. Firstly, minute types of houses can be dependent on various personalities and lifestyles of owners. To illustrate, for typical characteristics of work, business people or university students rarely spent hours at home, apart from resting and short recreational activities. Therefore, possessing an adequate house is unnecessary as there will be a shortage of repair or cleaning, which creates a total waste. Second, as accommodation and properties are experiencing an upward tendency in modern society, owning a small residence is an affordable selection. This can be explained as fewer expenditures and extravagant requirements are needed in this kind of house, which is indisputably appropriate for working-class families or students. All in all, adaptive features and economic expenses in this pricey period are key positive aspects of small housing development.
On the other hand, it is true that the growth of small-size accommodation has provoked a bunch of issues related to the environment and human quality. In terms of ecological problems, the high demand for affordable houses raises excessive exploitation of land and the city’s natural features such as plants and lakes. As repercussions, the alarming rate of pollution and thermal problems occur with lethal heat periods and the disappearance of trees playing a vital role in reducing polluted gases in large cities. Furthermore, residents’ life quality in small houses, which are akin to captivity, is desperately awful. The lack of space for physical exercise encourage sedentary lifestyles, which is a key factor contributing to health problems, in accordance with worse air standard, and can cause fatal disease in residents. Negative consequences of small home development to residents’ health and lifestyle are likely to decrease life expectancy in modern metropolitans.
In brief, both negative and positive sides which stem from the growth of small homes can occur, with the fact that the cons eclipse the better influence in this day and age.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, second, so, therefore, apart from, in brief, kind of, no doubt, such as, as a result, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2076.0 1615.20841683 129% => OK
No of words: 378.0 315.596192385 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49206349206 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20225610539 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 176.041082164 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621693121693 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 665.1 506.74238477 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.5327228687 49.4020404114 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.117647059 106.682146367 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2352941176 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06120827912 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.15771377064 0.244688304435 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0443055505082 0.084324248473 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0386658275793 0.0667982634062 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0954031616414 0.151304729494 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0320024445505 0.056905535591 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.86 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.66 8.58950901804 124% => OK
difficult_words: 142.0 78.4519038076 181% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.