It is irrefutable to say that traffic bottlenecks is increasing with each passing day, while masses give various types of opinion to reduce the level of traffic. Some folks ponder that government had better build more train and subway lines, and rest of the individuals think that government should spent more money on wider roads. Which can reduce the level of traffic.
On the one hand, use of public transportation reduces to traffic snarls. In another words, if government more train tracks, then people give more important to train because, they can easily save their time as well as money owing to use of trains therefore, they can less use to private vechicles which are main reason of traffic. Apart from that, if goverment invest the lion's share of funds on train's lines, then accident rate will decline, which also encourage to people to use trains as other private vechicles in order to their safty. As a result, the rate of traffic will be declined.
On the other hand, wider road also plays a vital role to reduce traffic bottlenecks. Firstly, if roads become wider, then people will have more space to stop their vechicles in any type of emergency, and other people can easily cover to their long distances with few minutes sans any difficulty. Secondly, if government allocate chunks of money to build more roads, then some people will use to these ways for their destinations as against to same road therefore, the problem of traffic can be reduced.
To sum up, it is lucid that government had better spend equal money to improve the condition of train tracks and subway lines along with roads to make them wider.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 333, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...should spent more money on wider roads. Which can reduce the level of traffic. On ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 464, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'peopling'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'encourage' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: peopling
...rate will decline, which also encourage to people to use trains as other private vechicle...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, while, apart from, as a result, as well as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1360.0 1615.20841683 84% => OK
No of words: 281.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.83985765125 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.3806845061 2.80592935109 85% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 176.041082164 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523131672598 0.561755894193 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 421.2 506.74238477 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => 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: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 70.608336548 49.4020404114 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.636363636 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5454545455 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.0 7.06120827912 184% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.379813180529 0.244688304435 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.152170182511 0.084324248473 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0623860728584 0.0667982634062 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.230035444967 0.151304729494 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105278894785 0.056905535591 185% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 50.2224549098 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 12.4159519038 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.63 8.58950901804 89% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 78.4519038076 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.