Over the past decades, a surge has been seen in divorce rate in some affluent nations. This phenomenon has sparked a heated debate on whether a wedding party should be a result of emotion or an acquirement of materialistic benefits like financial support and reputation. This essay is set to explore both positions, yet I would contend that love is the key of marriage whereas families formed under materialism are likely to translate into a misery.
First of all, evident is the fact that most couples who get married for the first time have a yearning to stay with one's partner in the entire life, and to conceive a baby under their names. In fact, such craving is a corollary of compassion - an emotion that allow one be solicitous and care about another with intimacy. Consequently, to intensify the relationship, these parents are more willing to lavish their time and resources to their children.
However, recent interviews conducted by the Love Society showed some alternative ideology pervading in the minds of the youngsters. Indeed, the conventional sense of aforementioned affection is not a crucial factor prior to their marriage; over half of the respondents argue that they would get closer eventually afterward. Meanwhile, 80% of them are perplexed about the shortfall of economic resources that might hinder the development of a family on the condition that they get married to those less wealthy. This perception could be readily expound in a society that are deemed incredibly materialistic. Therefore, the financial support accompanied with the wealthy is not only at attraction, but also an assurance to their foreseeable future.
Given the arguments from both views, I would defend the notion that love is intrinsically the most pivotal element that leads to prolonged relationship, and the well-being of the members from these ensuing families can be flourished with affection.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 117, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...first time have a yearning to stay with ones partner in the entire life, and to conc...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, so, therefore, well, whereas, while, in fact, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1602.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 307.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21824104235 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95962172737 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612377850163 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 507.6 506.74238477 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 44.6109727409 49.4020404114 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.5 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5833333333 20.7667163134 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.58333333333 7.06120827912 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => 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: 0.0907385105394 0.244688304435 37% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0290361028961 0.084324248473 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0204215833801 0.0667982634062 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0493091270095 0.151304729494 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0138099218798 0.056905535591 24% => 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: 15.9 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.17 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.