In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe money should be spent on improving existing public transport.. discuss both views and give your own opinion
There is an ongoing debate on which transport method should be improved. Some people favour if more highspeed intercity train tracks are implemented, and others prefer the development of existing communal transport facilities. In my view, both the above means of transportation should be developed because each facilitates different sets of commuters.
On the one hand, due to the lack of houses and lands in urban areas, people tend to shift to suburbs and rural areas for living, but these people must have a speedy and comfortable transport means to reach and exit urban areas, where most of the job opportunities are available. Therefore, by spending money on constructing highspeed intercity trains, these people can travel between their dwellings and workplaces comfortably without wasting valuable work time on heavily congested roads. The development of high-speed train infrastructure will help in the above scenario.
On the other hand, upgrading existing public transport means is also vital for a much energy efficient and cleaner environment in highly congested cities. In order to make cities more cleaner, low emission vehicles with battery power can be introduced, and more public transport methods like trams and light rail can be made available to reduce the usage of personal vehicles in the city limits, which can help to reduce both sound and air pollution in cities.
In conclusion, both high-speed intercity train transportations to be built and current public transportations are equally important in allocating money for them because each method has its unique benefits for society.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 80, Rule ID: A_MUCH_NN1[1]
Message: Maybe you should omit the article "a", leaving only 'much'.
Suggestion: much
...ublic transport means is also vital for a much energy efficient and cleaner environmen...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 180, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'cleaner' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: cleaner
...ngested cities. In order to make cities more cleaner, low emission vehicles with battery pow...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, therefore, well, as for, in conclusion, in my view, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 6.0 24.0651302605 25% => 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: 1366.0 1615.20841683 85% => OK
No of words: 251.0 315.596192385 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4422310757 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91031425258 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 176.041082164 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.609561752988 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 418.5 506.74238477 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 16.0721442886 56% => 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: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 76.7738381366 49.4020404114 155% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.777777778 106.682146367 142% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8888888889 20.7667163134 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.77777777778 7.06120827912 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.267208857485 0.244688304435 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108509505569 0.084324248473 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.046792882615 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160558666856 0.151304729494 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.036918296708 0.056905535591 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 50.2224549098 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.44 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.