It is often argued that ancient buildings should be strenuously preserved, as they signify the rich heritage of culture and traditions handed down between generations. However, some may claim that modern society needs new buildings, instead. I will discuss both sides of arguments and give a concluding view here.
On the one hand, making coordinated efforts seem to be essential to preserve historical buildings, as they are a valuable source of cultural identity and traditions. These may range from a conventional lifestyle in the past to the religious rituals and traditional design of buildings. By longer existence of such structures, therefore, new generations can be fully aware of the richness of their history and traditions. Furthermore, ancient buildings are of great research value to provide historian and anthropologists with relics of past to untangle historical questions. Finally, having such monumental buildings, a significant boost in the tourism industry seems inevitable, eventually leading to bring financial and social benefits for the host country.
On the other hand, opponents point out that recent advances in technology have revolutionized the way people live, and thus they need to have modern infrastructures to promote the greater sense of satisfaction and productivity. It may originate from the construction of new modern schools, universities, hospitals, roads and a decent transport system. For this reason, such ancient buildings should be replaced with more developed structures to serve people`s demands. Moreover, it seems sensible for the local authorities to embellish residential areas with new buildings with incentive external designs which consider the qualities of beauty and modern shape. This is perhaps tremendously beneficial to modernize cities in the world today.
In conclusion, I believe that any efforts made to protect old buildings to being replaced with new structures seem a wiser course since it helps to preserve cultural heritage and traditions.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, thus, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1721.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 303.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6798679868 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14437460864 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.620462046205 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 523.8 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.4656994404 49.4020404114 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.928571429 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6428571429 20.7667163134 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35714285714 7.06120827912 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => 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: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.173508276356 0.244688304435 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0538842074608 0.084324248473 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0634977016429 0.0667982634062 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111145032956 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0338332018765 0.056905535591 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.66 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.1 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.