Question :Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer
It is an indisputable fact that human is a social creature. In this regard, establish a connection with other people and keep the relationship, is one of the essential steps in socializing. With this in mind, some people approve of this idea that when it comes to happiness, keeping a friendship with a given number of friends for long period is more advantageous. On the contrary, others hold the opposite point of view stating making a new friend with ease is a contributing factor to a more enjoyable life. Personally, I concur with the former group owing to the reason substantiated as follows.
To commence with, the more time passes from begging the friendship, the more trust is formed between partners. To elucidate this point, trust is considered as the pillar of every communication which strengthens by the passage of time and shows reciprocity between friends. Taking this into consideration, building a high level of trust could have resulted in creating an atmosphere that aids friends to be capable of counting on each other in either crisis or joyful moments of life. In this vein of thought, having supportive friends lead to brings a sense of happiness and reduces anxiety significantly due to the fact that they know loyal friends have their backs and support them to overcome predicament. On the contrary, new friendships are deprived of a deep level of trust which prevents friends from confiding in each other and sharing their issues and concerns. As a result, should a person do not have trustworthy friends, they will experience enormous pressure ensuing from bearing strain lonely thorough the tough time.
The second worth-mentioning reason that comes to my mind is that should people spend more time with a like-minded friend for a long period, they will have more common topics for communication and. It is crystal clear that, as time passes, human beings' comprehension from their partner mindset improves and they find similarities in taste and attitude between each other, which lead to increase intimacy and hang out with their friend more frequently. In this respect. It is confirmed by researches that spending time with a like-minded friend has a positive correlation with mental. Indeed, in a long-lasting relationship, people have an opportunity for revealing fears or happiness and receive an appropriate response based on the similar mindsets they have which lead to alleviating stress and induce states of euphoria, eventually. My own experience is an illustration of this notion, one of the most pleasant time in my life is lunchtime at works when I have group chatting with my close friends who see the world through a similar lens with me, and we have a constructive conversation about daily life and by doing so, I can revitalize my fatigue and achieve recovery for rest of days.
To draw a conclusion, I strongly advocate the notion that the ability to keep friends for long period is more lucrative in order to bring more ebullient in life. This is because not only does the long-term connection with trusted people bring a sense of being supported and put the mind at ease due to the reason, they can count on each other in difficult situations, but it also provides an opportunity for more comfortable and pleasant communication with like-minded friends.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 543, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'bring'.
Suggestion: bring
...ught, having supportive friends lead to brings a sense of happiness and reduces anxiet...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 245, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'beings'' or 'being's'?
Suggestion: beings'; being's
...ystal clear that, as time passes, human beings comprehension from their partner mindse...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, second, so, then, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 13.8261648746 145% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 43.0788530466 104% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 52.1666666667 167% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.0752688172 161% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2759.0 1977.66487455 140% => OK
No of words: 549.0 407.700716846 135% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02550091075 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84053189512 4.48103885553 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91779741586 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 275.0 212.727598566 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.500910746812 0.524837075471 95% => OK
syllable_count: 839.7 618.680645161 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 20.1344086022 139% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 81.4241995786 48.9658058833 166% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.210526316 100.406767564 145% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.8947368421 20.6045352989 140% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.21052631579 5.45110844103 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 11.8709677419 126% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.261147526305 0.236089414692 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0905449325156 0.076458572812 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.067605883223 0.0737576698707 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181315773318 0.150856017488 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0461936664841 0.0645574589148 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 11.7677419355 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 58.1214874552 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.1575268817 128% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.49 10.9000537634 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.01818996416 111% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 86.8835125448 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.0537634409 131% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => 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.