In your country, did people in the past keep in contact in the same ways as they do today?
In the last few decades the ways to communicate had changed completely. In the past if you desired to find out news, you had to watch news broadcast on TV or to listen to the radio. Also, you could get out from the home, to meet people and to ask them what’s going on. If you had relatives or friends living in other part of country and you wanted to know how their affairs, you had to write them letters and to wait weeks or month for response. If you had some important or emergency notice, you had to send telegram.
Nowadays we communicate with help of new technologies and developments such as internet and cellphones. Of course, we continue to meet people face to face, but in most cases it is easier and naturally for us, to call somebody or to send message in a social net.
On one hand that way of communication is remarkable. The new facilities allow us to find out news from around the world, and to see people on the other part of the planet. It allows studying online and promoting of many necessary social projects.
On the other hand, connecting people in that way kills our communicating skills. During talking and messaging via social net, we have time to think before we had to react. Also, if we dislike certain received message, we can ignore it or send emoticon only. Meeting face to face doesn’t allow us the same opportunity. We must react immediately.
On my opinion, we have to return to few old ways of connecting.
In conclusion, skills of communication face to face are necessary for the best life of future generation.
Comments
Are you seriously????? 1.0
Are you seriously????? 1.0 out of 9????
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 34, Rule ID: TO_TOO[2]
Message: Did you mean 'too'?
Suggestion: too
...ly. On my opinion, we have to return to few old ways of connecting. In conclus...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, in conclusion, of course, such as, in most cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 13.1623246493 23% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => 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: 1290.0 1615.20841683 80% => OK
No of words: 281.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.59074733096 5.12529762239 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71154761529 2.80592935109 97% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.555160142349 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 407.7 506.74238477 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.5079795116 49.4020404114 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.8823529412 106.682146367 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5294117647 20.7667163134 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05882352941 7.06120827912 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.38176352705 137% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.0722147804687 0.244688304435 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0280455737903 0.084324248473 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0309880398046 0.0667982634062 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0377011443698 0.151304729494 25% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0201273585666 0.056905535591 35% => 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: 8.5 13.0946893788 65% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 50.2224549098 127% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.3001002004 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.05 12.4159519038 73% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.58950901804 88% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 78.4519038076 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.