Transportation plays a vital role in the daily life of human beings. From one's home to one's work place, people utilize the transport system on a daily basis. It is often argued that government should invest great amount of budget on building fast trains than spending money on public transport. In my view, I believe public transport is conducive to the society and its merits outweigh that of high speed rail.
It is irrefutable that speedy trains has maken human life much more convenient than ever. By its high speed, people could save massive amount of time on traveling. Take Taiwan for example, prior to the invention of high speed rial, people used to spend four hours from Kaohsiung to Taipei City. However, the sophisticated technology of speedy rail has curtailed travelers' journey to one hour and thirty minutes. In this way, people could save more time on commuting. On the other hand, high speed rail is pricey for certain people who have financial issues. This is particularly true in Taiwan where the price of high speed rail is nearly three times of national trains or bus.
People believe improving public transport is necessary due to the fact that taking public transport is beneficial to the society. First, it could alleviate traffic congestion arised from private cars. For instance, the increasing number of automobile often induces terrible jams during rush hours. By taking public transport, this issue could be effectively mitigated. Secondly, taking advantage of public transport would reduce the pollution produced by private vehicles. To demonstrate, during the process of engine operating, it generates massive quantities of contaminated gas into atmosphere, which is detrimental to human health. Utilizing public transport could cut down on the emission of harmful gas.
All in all, there are pros and cons in both high speed rail and public transport. I firmly consent that public transport is favorable to the society and its benefits outweigh that of high speed rail.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 75, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...in the daily life of human beings. From ones home to ones work place, people utilize...
^^^^
Line 5, column 622, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...into atmosphere, which is detrimental to human health. Utilizing public transport...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, secondly, so, for example, for instance, in my view, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1685.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 326.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16871165644 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60446067381 2.80592935109 93% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561349693252 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 512.1 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.6278844648 49.4020404114 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 84.25 106.682146367 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.3 20.7667163134 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.9 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.202294047453 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0629301826145 0.084324248473 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0596645433488 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122903655546 0.151304729494 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0518575136387 0.056905535591 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.0946893788 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 50.2224549098 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.41 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.58950901804 97% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.7795591182 74% => 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.