Some people believe that people who read books can develop more imagination and language skills than those who prefer to watch TV.
The educational value of televisions is undeniable, yet argument about its utility and benefits seems to not be ceased. Many believe that reading books generates one’s imagination and linguistic aptitude better than watching TV, of which I second.
The intention of studying language through TV is upstanding: to learn by imitation. Indeed, this is one of the most effective ways to comprehend speaking and listening skills, as you watch these graphics without subtitles. By repeating, one can certainly mimic a native accent and receive a positive progress. Driven by this vision, this method has grown significantly in the last decade, and has been widely recognized as beneficial. However, this is not as helpful when it comes to imagination, since observing visual on-screen will reduce creativity.
Studying by books will definitely develop one’s intellect. To begin with, readers will be able to fantasize images through the flow of words. Recent survey informed that a well-described book can automatically transforms words into visual when it comes to one’s mind, which stimulates their imagination. As in language skills, books enhance individuals’ vocabulary and creativity due to their exquisite way of interpretation and sophisticated choice of words. Regarding of this, books can only develop reading and writing among the four fundamental language skills, which learners need to balance and associate with watching television on a daily basis to maximize their ability.
To recapitulate, books are critical for individuals wanting to further their imagination, but one it is compulsory to combine the two methods for a constructive foundation of language aptitude.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 294, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'positive progress'.
Suggestion: positive progress
...y mimic their native accent and receive a positive progress. Driven by this vision, this method has...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 216, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'can' requires the base form of the verb: 'transform'
Suggestion: transform
...a well-described book can automatically transforms into visual when it comes to one's...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, regarding, second, so, well, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1450.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 255.0 315.596192385 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.6862745098 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18008992544 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.639215686275 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 454.5 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => 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: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.495629924 49.4020404114 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.538461538 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6153846154 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.61538461538 7.06120827912 65% => 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: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16101973163 0.244688304435 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0572415088619 0.084324248473 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.062998977812 0.0667982634062 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0972496629321 0.151304729494 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0483397415409 0.056905535591 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.72 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.03 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 78.4519038076 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.