Recently, concentration of industry and economics in urban areas afford them better opportunities to enhance the quality of life for citizens living in cities rather than in countryside. This gap would inevitably pose several negativities that the society need to tackle.
First, people will unconsciously tend to relocate to a better place in terms of potential job prospect, modern education and bureaucracy systems for their career and family, population imbalance or abnormal concentration may occur as the result. Several studies have unfolded the fact that those living in urban areas appear to have more mental and physical illnesses than others. This would profoundly change the living standard negatively, from high level today to extremely low one down the road. For instance, citizens living in Ho Chi Minh City and Shanghai are reported to frequently suffer from different types of stress due to high level noises from moving vehicles, civil construction and the vast number of people speaking in one place. In addition, spending most of their time in the daily urban traffic congestions might be a precursor of future backbone malfunction and respiratory deceases due to lack of moving their position and breathing fresh air every day.
Government, thereby should propose appropriate strategies to get over that harmful obstacle, and achieve national sustainable development. To illustrate, countryside with their nature landscapes could attract both domestic and international tourist, which are normally considered as the main source of foreign currency. This non-smocked industry would be increasingly fortified if the nation could provide proper planning such as enhancing local living standard and transport system between urban and rural areas. Such improvement would catalyze numerous avenues for government to spread out the population.
In conclusion, living in cities could possibly lead to the reverse of living standard and government therefore should play as a key factor to foreseen this foreseen impact.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 33, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...ion. In conclusion, living in cities could possibly lead to the reverse of living standard ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, so, therefore, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1733.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 308.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62662337662 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8777206872 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.642857142857 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 535.5 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 53.196895795 49.4020404114 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.416666667 106.682146367 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6666666667 20.7667163134 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 7.06120827912 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160824460501 0.244688304435 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0511607889209 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0453516499359 0.0667982634062 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0957193570541 0.151304729494 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.01501056589 0.056905535591 26% => 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: 17.9 13.0946893788 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.67 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.67 8.58950901804 124% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 78.4519038076 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.