Main purpose of visiting different places is to know that place and discover many things. Is it prudent to say that guides are not useful ? Two different perspectives surface while meticulously evaluation this issue. One perspective answers aforementioned question in affirmative way with utmost conviction whereas another makes its disapproval evident by denying its presence. Personally I have proclivity towards thought that guides are useful because of two main reasons. First is they are source of knowledge and another no chance of being lost in new place.
While evaluating first point it can be understood that, Guide, a person who knows everything about that place. For trip we choose places like forts, different historical places as well as forests but If we are choosing places like hill station then we do not need any guide. In case of above mentioned places, places having historical background we will watch only monuments, buildings and different art. But with guide watching this places with some knowledge about importance of this place, who built this place will increase the joy of trip. Without guide concept, Some people might find it boring and tiring. A good guide will make your trip interesting.
Few yrs ago I visited a fort named Sindhudurga, located in Indian Ocean was beautiful. After few hrs of wondering on fort we hired a local guide then real trip started. He was experienced and funny too. He made our day memorable with his stories regarding fort. At the end of day our hearts were filled with proud of having such courageous history.
Everyone has wish to have a trip to deep forest but visiting without guide will be like inviting our death. Forest are places out of mobile networks and filled with lots of deadly animals. Forest shape changes with change in season so there are more chances of getting lost in woods. Tour guide can take us to forest and show us area and in case of wild attack he can help us to be safe. For local people this guiding business is main source of income. Many trip places are located in urban areas where development is yet to be touched.
After this holistic analysis we can clearly see that points are in favor of thought of guides being helpful. Hence in conclusion I cogently agree with it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 88, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... located in Indian Ocean was beautiful. After few hrs of wondering on fort we hired a...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 94, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hrs seems to be countable; consider using: 'few '.
Suggestion: few
...ed in Indian Ocean was beautiful. After few hrs of wondering on fort we hired a local g...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...e development is yet to be touched. After this holistic analysis we can clearly s...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 110, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...vor of thought of guides being helpful. Hence in conclusion I cogently agree with it....
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, if, regarding, so, then, well, whereas, while, as for, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 15.1003584229 146% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 43.0788530466 91% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1890.0 1977.66487455 96% => OK
No of words: 388.0 407.700716846 95% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87113402062 4.8611393121 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43821085614 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49834965121 2.67179642975 94% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590206185567 0.524837075471 112% => OK
syllable_count: 594.0 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 9.59856630824 21% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.8975622197 48.9658058833 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.6 100.406767564 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.52 20.6045352989 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.96 5.45110844103 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => 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: 0.162812290217 0.236089414692 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0497995532658 0.076458572812 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0680205411022 0.0737576698707 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0808132017716 0.150856017488 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0324468506373 0.0645574589148 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.3 11.7677419355 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 58.1214874552 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 10.1575268817 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.67 10.9000537634 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.01818996416 96% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 86.8835125448 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.