Some people think that the increasing use of computers and mobile phones for communication has had a negative effect on young people’s reading and writing skills. Does the advantage outweigh the disadvantage?
Nowadays, many hold the view that more frequently use of chatting through electronic devices is detrimental to the young’s reading and writing skills. However, there is a body of opinion which claims that it has some advantages. In this essay, I will examine both sides of the view to seek a conclusion.
To begin with, it is undeniable that the increasing communication by computers and mobile phones would have a bad effect on training young people’s reading and writing skills. For example, when the young generation contact with their friends online, they would just type on their keyboard instead of holding a pen and writing by themselves. To be more specific, they would seldom read and write, let alone developing a good skill of it.
On the other hand, nonetheless, sending messages through mobile phones and computers is of great benefit to the relationship between people. For instance, online talking could overcome the geographical barriers, making it possible for family members who don’t live together to chat with each other more frequently. Furthermore, it’s also beneficial to the efficiency of communication. Compared with face-to-face talk or writing e-mails, sending messages online is obviously less time-consuming because whenever you are, you could get in connection with others immediately.
To summarize, there is no doubt that rising communicating use of electronic devices would impair young’s reading and writing skills. At the same time, nevertheless, this could improve people’s relationship and raise the communicating efficiency. In the final analysis, therefore, one can only conclude that the positive effect of this phenomenon outweigh the negative ones.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 11, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hold seems to be countable; consider using: 'many holds'.
Suggestion: many holds
Nowadays, many hold the view that more frequently use of ch...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, therefore, for example, for instance, no doubt, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1464.0 1615.20841683 91% => OK
No of words: 262.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.58778625954 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11401732467 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.62213740458 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 506.74238477 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => 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: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.6617353937 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.615384615 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1538461538 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0 7.06120827912 156% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.341213449576 0.244688304435 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109716120648 0.084324248473 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110837783901 0.0667982634062 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192131118691 0.151304729494 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0812759135781 0.056905535591 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.14 12.4159519038 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 78.4519038076 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.