Some people argue that technological inventions, such as mobile phones, are making people socially less interactive.
Do you agree or disagree?Some people argue that technological inventions, such as mobile phones, are making people socially less interactive.
Do you agree or disagree?
21st century, the new era of technology and rat race for technological inventions has made world within reach to everyone. Having some concerns raised by the few people arguing against technological inventions spoiling social interaction in the society represents one side view of the story. My opinion does not completely follow these people. In fact, I would consider my opinion contrary to this side of story.
Firstly, let us visualize marvelous contribution of technology in putting together people through our so-called magnificent social apps such as Facebook, twitter, Skype, WhatsApp and ending up with countless platforms. Couples settled in different countries open up their charm of this beautiful morning with heart touching and personalized smile of their partner with this magic of Skype. You may meet with your close relative settled in other corner of world in few hours, thanks to Airplanes invention. Many more example of such inventions can be listed down along with list of their contributions towards making people more aware and accessible for social interaction.
On the contrary, although some people argues against the negative effects of technologies. These gadgets has eaten up most of time which was alternatively available for social interaction. These people refer to the times when people used to sit together, share their thoughts. They think that mobile phones and other gadgets should not be given to children in early age and allow them to physically interact with the people. Nowadays, lots of people are keeping themselves occupied with these gadgets and leaves very less time for their family members.
To conclude, it is baseless to curse the technologies to eat up time available for our social interaction rather than changing their attitude and reaping the benefits of these technologies to increase our connectivity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 106, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'have', 'haven'.
Suggestion: have; haven
... effects of technologies. These gadgets has eaten up most of time which was alterna...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, may, so, in fact, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1582.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 292.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41780821918 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80381378475 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.626712328767 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 485.1 506.74238477 96% => 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: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.9977550516 49.4020404114 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.0 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8571428571 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.78571428571 7.06120827912 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.262947832247 0.244688304435 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0867729888667 0.084324248473 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0749150472716 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14412692693 0.151304729494 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0444397255855 0.056905535591 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => 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: 14.16 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 78.4519038076 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => 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.