Over the last decades cell phones had made it into our daily life and, to some extent, many see them as essential tools. Cell phones are powerful instruments that allow us to surf the Internet, to text quickly, to receive vital news, and to communicate with people far away. Concerns arise, however, when it comes to using phones in public spaces, like parks or movie theaters. Some claim that cell phone conversations should be even banned in crowded places, while, on the other side, others disagree. This essay will examine those tow opposite viewpoints and explain how banning cell phones is actually unfeasible.
Along computers and the Internet, cell phones are one of the most outstanding breakthrough of the last century. Regarded at beginning as nothing more that an expensive accessory for well-off persons, cell phones gradually have become widespread among the population. Over the years, prices have dropped, technology has rapidly improved, and devices have become more and more compact as well as reliable. Consequently, it is commonplace for people nowadays to talk on the phone on the street, on the bus or in other public spaces. In some cases, cell phones can save life, when it comes for instance to calling an ambulance or the police.
Conversely to the positive aspects mentioned above, relying on cell phones to conduct private conversations in public spaces, is a quite annoying practice. Especially loud talking is a disrespectful toward other people who in some cases may need concentration or are seeking for relax. In other contexts, like during a concert, can even negative affect the players' performance. In the wake of these facts, some call for a total ban of cell phones in public spaces, which, for many reasons, is a long shot. First, cell phones are instrumental in saving lives. In crowded places, it is not uncommon for some people to pass out or, worst, suffer from an hearth attack. At a time where minutes can draw the line between life and death, a quick call to the emergency number can make the difference. Secondly, governments cannot interfere in such a way in the private lives of the citizens, so that a complete ban would be unconstitutional.
In conclusion, it is therefore essential that people learn how to manage their phones and to respect each others. In public spaces like parks and movie theaters conversations should be permitted but users should also be aware of other people around them and try to use a moderate level of voice and proper language.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 15, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'decades'' or 'decade's'?
Suggestion: decades'; decade's
Over the last decades cell phones had made it into our daily ...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 88, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun see seems to be countable; consider using: 'many sees'.
Suggestion: many sees
...nto our daily life and, to some extent, many see them as essential tools. Cell phones ar...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Conversely,
...calling an ambulance or the police. Conversely to the positive aspects mentioned above...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 358, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'players'' or 'player's'?
Suggestion: players'; player's
...a concert, can even negative affect the players performance. In the wake of these facts...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 649, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ople to pass out or, worst, suffer from an hearth attack. At a time where minutes ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, consequently, conversely, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, as well as, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 41.998997996 148% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2097.0 1615.20841683 130% => OK
No of words: 421.0 315.596192385 133% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9809976247 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52971130743 4.20363070211 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.694698711 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 176.041082164 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565320665083 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 664.2 506.74238477 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 17.0 4.76152304609 357% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.0432436205 49.4020404114 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 104.85 106.682146367 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.05 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.6 7.06120827912 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.314413438289 0.244688304435 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0965422080383 0.084324248473 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0796009371153 0.0667982634062 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202280303338 0.151304729494 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0576257069333 0.056905535591 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.0946893788 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.4159519038 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.