The rise in population in many parts of the world has catalyzed higher levels of traffic. In response to this trend, some claim that only by cutting down on the need for commuting to work, school or shopping can traffic be reduced. However, I must disagree with this rather militant point of view. With the following composition, I will elaborate upon two reasons supporting my point of view.
First of all, reducing the need for people to travel from home to carry out their daily essential activities may not lead to a decrease in traffic at all. While it is possible to receive education or complete work without any usage of cars and similar vehicles, it is impossible to deliver groceries and other goods without any use of vehicles. Moreover, should people shift from going to brick-and-mortar stores to having their groceries shipped to their front doors, vendors and grocers must use even more cars, bikes and trucks to get those groceries delivered. Generating even higher levels of traffic, this can put more stress upon the traffic infrastructure system.
Secondly, cutting on the requirement for people to leave their homes for school, work or shopping is far from the only practical solution to the traffic question. A more practical and economical solution is the improvement and promotion of the local public transportation system. Bus, tram and train systems, when successfully renovated, can allow for more riders; therefore, people are more incentivised to take advantage of these systems, which will lead to a noticeable reduction in traffic.
In conclusion, cutting down on the need to depart home to carry out work, education or essential purchases is not the only solution to the pressing problem of crowded traffic. This is because such a scheme is far from being the optimal solution, and it may even prove to be counter-productive.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1561.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 307.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08469055375 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86363868701 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550488599349 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 506.74238477 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => 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: 46.8984803125 49.4020404114 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.076923077 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6153846154 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.84615384615 7.06120827912 111% => 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 : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.254442386238 0.244688304435 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0843405713511 0.084324248473 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0856275895185 0.0667982634062 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145576032627 0.151304729494 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0278622620165 0.056905535591 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.