Since time immemorial it is a common practice to exchange merchandise among the nations. However, due to globalization, this trend has been skyrocketing for the past few decades. While few experts believe that grocery stores can sell a mixture of both foreign and domestic staples, others are in favor of vend products only from local farmers. In my opinion, although there might be one or two advantages by buying in from other countries, supermarkets should focus more and more on promoting native eats.
Importing foodstuffs from other countries could be a benefit to maintain a trade relationship between the governments and it would also help the dwellers to know what to consume and what not to consume when they travelled to abroad. However, there are a plethora of reasons for promoting domestic essentials. The first point worth making is that the vending of domestically cultivated food not only improves the national economy but also creates plenty of job opportunities in the agriculture field because it requires more cultivation to maintain the balance between demand and supply. As a result of it, authorities can provide a sophisticated living environment to the communities.
The second most important point is that imported stocks are either stored or available in a frozen state, consuming such items could be hazardous for health. It wouldn’t be the case with national commodities. If supermarkets sell more regional products, citizens can purchase both fresh and hygiene eatables such as vegetables and meat. Thus, it would be helpful to lead a healthy lifestyle. On top of it, vegetables and other supplies which are available locally, play a vital role in supplying much-needed nutrients as well as proteins respective to its weather conditions.
To conclude, even though there are few minor benefits in selling other territory edibles, vendors should focus more on selling local crops for several good reasons for instance growth in the economy, leading a healthy lifestyle.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
Since time immemorial it is a common practice...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 230, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e economy, leading a healthy lifestyle.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, thus, well, while, for instance, such as, as a result, as well as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => 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: 1693.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 319.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30721003135 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9049093014 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.617554858934 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.0225052794 49.4020404114 138% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.928571429 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7857142857 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.78571428571 7.06120827912 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => 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: 0.164498792915 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0441447239479 0.084324248473 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0480109900234 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.092878710332 0.151304729494 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0412544461372 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.58 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 78.4519038076 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.