Some businesses now say that no one can smoke cigarettes in any of their offices. Some governments have banned smoking in all public places. This is a good idea but it takes away some of our freedom.
In more developed countries, there is increasing concern about previously unknown dangers to people’s health, now that traditional killers (particularly contagious diseases) can usually be dealt with by modern medical science. One of these dangers is smoking, which is now generally accepted as being a leading cause of heart and lung disease, and hence of premature death. As a result, many countries have introduced legislation banning smoking in all public places. Is this a good idea? Does it take away some of our freedom? My answer to both questions is “yes”. The main problem with smoking is that it can be a danger not only to those who smoke, but also to those who do not. There is widespread evidence of second-hand smoking causing the deaths of numerous people, though admittedly this evidence is not accepted by everyone, especially smokers themselves and the tobacco industry. Smoking can affect non-smokers in other ways. Many non-smokers dislike going to places where there are smokers because the smell of tobacco gets onto their clothes. The direct effect of this is having to have their clothes cleaned afterwards, but it has another result – non-smokers tend to stay away from places where there are smokers. The resultant loss of revenue can be a major problem for businesses in the leisure industry. Smokers would argue that their freedom is being taken away by anti-smoking legislation. They are correct. Legislation usually results in loss of freedom for someone. The reason that people generally accept legislation is that people understand that legislation is designed to benefit them. Almost everyone dislikes paying taxes, but it is generally accepted that taxes are necessary since governments need to finance activities in such fields as education, administration and infrastructure. This is also the case with anti-smoking legislation. It is designed to protect the health of smokers and non-smokers alike. To conclude, I accept that banning smoking in public places is a limit on freedom, but I believe that it is a necessary one to help protect the health of the general public.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 2109, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...y one to help protect the health of the general public.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, second, so, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 13.1623246493 198% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 24.0651302605 133% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1785.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 341.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23460410557 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92788778748 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548387096774 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 560.7 506.74238477 111% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 63.1910594942 49.4020404114 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.25 106.682146367 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.05 20.7667163134 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.05 7.06120827912 29% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 1.0 4.38176352705 23% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
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: 0.284664493686 0.244688304435 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0884764646849 0.084324248473 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0896725041234 0.0667982634062 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.284664493686 0.151304729494 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.056905535591 0% => 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: 11.7 13.0946893788 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.