The extended family is less important now than it was in the past
Due to the increasing rate of industrialization and urban development, the number of extended families has plunged drastically. I believe the function of the extended family has decreased significantly. I feel this way for several reasons, which I will explore in the following paragraph.
First of all, the existence of the extended family in the past serves as the assistance of taking care of young children if some of their family members need to work outside. However, job opportunity nowadays is abundant in urban areas. If people choose to stay in rural areas where most extended family exists, workers are paid relatively less compared to those who work downtowns. My experience is a compelling example of this. In the past, there are numerous carpenters and farmers in my hometown. Because of the need for tremendous labor in these industries, most citizens here live with relatives, forming extended families everywhere. However, when these industries suffer from the competitiveness of companies overseas, local workers had no choice but to leave for larger cities in order to earn a higher salary. Therefore, the function of the extended family has gradually disappeared due to the transformation of social structures.
Secondly, people in the past tend to live together or at a relatively close distance to take care of each other and form the relationship of belongings. Nonetheless, this tradition has become a memory of the past. It is because people are now crammed with their works and studies. They have to take heed of what is happening individually, not to mention caring about their relatives. For example, people used to provide their family members with caring services about young infants if people need to go outside. However, it turns out that most people now seek assistance from nannies or professional caregivers because of the distance between family members. Eventually, the relationship and connection between relatives are nowhere to be found and relatives could only meet with each other a few times in a year.
Even though a proportion of people contend that the importance of the extended family has remained, the popularity of this family structure has indeed elapsed given the fact the increasing numbers of DINK families. With fewer family members in a home and a larger distance between relatives, it is inevitable that people will find difficulties in finding this rare phenomenon in the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Due to the increasing rate of industrial...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ll explore in the following paragraph. First of all, the existence of the exten...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... transformation of social structures. Secondly, people in the past tend to liv...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...with each other a few times in a year. Even though a proportion of people conte...
^^
Line 4, column 393, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing this rare phenomenon in the future.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, i feel, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 9.8082437276 61% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.0286738351 63% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 43.0788530466 56% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.0752688172 211% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2052.0 1977.66487455 104% => OK
No of words: 393.0 407.700716846 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2213740458 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9576800817 2.67179642975 111% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 212.727598566 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534351145038 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 665.1 618.680645161 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 9.59856630824 83% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.7481283048 48.9658058833 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.6 100.406767564 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.65 20.6045352989 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 5.45110844103 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.88709677419 184% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248863592954 0.236089414692 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0734581718197 0.076458572812 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0629367260154 0.0737576698707 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150017742062 0.150856017488 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0427271826698 0.0645574589148 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 58.1214874552 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 10.9000537634 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.01818996416 109% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 86.8835125448 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.