It is discussed that facts such as achievement in the society and personal wealth should be measured to value an individual in today’s world, while qualities of old times like honour, kindness, and trust are becoming out of date. I agree with the former idea, but disagree with the latter.
Firstly, it is true that a wide range of population nowadays are judging others by their social position and material property, as these two items are the most effective ways to show one’s worth and difficult to make lies, especially in the public realm. One’s social status, usually measured by the community, based on their contribution, which not only how much they have earned for themselves but also how much they have done for other group members. A person’s material possessions can be seen as a reward coming from the public organisation through business activities, which can be councils, trades, or managements. Position and possessions, as they both coming from the public, are fair enough to judge a person’s value by all, now and always.
Secondly, the most adorable characteristics of all-human in history such as honour, kindness and trust still remain important at present, and will do in the future. Those golden qualities of humankind can bring positive influence to people’s mind, motivation and action by simply remembering these old-fashioned values. Their worth cannot be counted but can be transferred from one to another, for example, from fathers to sons, leaders to followers. Carried on by generation and generation, the importance of these spiritual wealth never fade throughout time.
To conclude, it is a reasonable way to count one’s worth according to their place in the society and wealth, whilst yesterday’s values, honour, kindness and trust, are continuously contribute to the new world.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 744, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[3]
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually not used at the end of a sentence.
... judge a person’s value by all, now and always. Secondly, the most adorable charact...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 182, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'contributed'.
Suggestion: contributed
...r, kindness and trust, are continuously contribute to the new world.
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, still, while, for example, such as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1548.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 294.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26530612245 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87498478388 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.615646258503 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 26.0 20.2975951904 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 54.8432778376 49.4020404114 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.727272727 106.682146367 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.7272727273 20.7667163134 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06120827912 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251970752768 0.244688304435 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0867585465643 0.084324248473 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0415109089085 0.0667982634062 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142600194888 0.151304729494 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0333304643412 0.056905535591 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 50.2224549098 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.4159519038 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.44 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.1190380762 123% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.