Some people prefer to go and visit the tourist attractions where there are many people. Others like the ones with fewer people. Which one do you prefer?
Nowadays, in the modern era, a governmet use different possibilitie their country has, in the regard of increasing their income from both natural and artificial situation. One of them most practical approach is by attracting tourist. Some people prefer to visit places where there are more people in there. However, others may hold an opposite viewpoint and a place with fewer people is their preferred place. When it comes to me, it is my firm coviction visiting place with more people is more attractive for me. To support this, there are several reasons, two of which are going to be aptly explored in the following.
First and foremost, the most prominent reason which comes to my mind is that the main objective of attracting tourist for a place is to increase the incomes eraned from it. As a result, on order to attract more people, governments are required to provide tourists with more facilities in a place to abble catch their eyes. Needless to say, more people in a place means more eye apealing feature as well as more feasible are provided for people in there. For example, a couple of years ago, I went to a trip to Shiraz. I decided to taste their famous food in a restaurant. There were two restaurant, and one of them was very crowded. I thought that due to the higher inclination of people toward this restaurant, it should has high-quality food and choose that as my final place to eat, after eating I found had reached to that conclusion too.
Another noteworthy reason that should be taken into account is that tourism places approach of offering their services at a lower price is one of their methods in order to attract more tourists. Due to the large number of people who go and back to these crowded places, they may offer their fees for example the fee for entering a historical place, at a lower price. Due to the current economic climate people are supposed to manage their money as well as possible, so going to places with more poeple can be considred as a cost-effective approach which ends up people not only saving their money, but also enjoying a tourism place.
In short, all the aforementioned reasons lead us to the conclusion that, going to a place with more people in there as tourist is a bettet course of action. The fact these places have the higher quality in their services, coupled with provideing people with a money saving intertainment, is the reason which strengthens my claim.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 587, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'restaurant' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'restaurants'.
Suggestion: restaurants
...us food in a restaurant. There were two restaurant, and one of them was very crowded. I th...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 722, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[2]
Message: The verb 'should' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
...eople toward this restaurant, it should has high-quality food and choose that as my...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, then, well, as to, for example, in short, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 9.8082437276 51% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 13.8261648746 51% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.0286738351 127% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 52.1666666667 125% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2006.0 1977.66487455 101% => OK
No of words: 426.0 407.700716846 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.70892018779 4.8611393121 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58122902565 2.67179642975 97% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 212.727598566 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516431924883 0.524837075471 98% => OK
syllable_count: 637.2 618.680645161 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6008679833 48.9658058833 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.444444444 100.406767564 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 20.6045352989 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 5.45110844103 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.298022781336 0.236089414692 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110130710839 0.076458572812 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100072337955 0.0737576698707 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.212467101112 0.150856017488 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0932890986147 0.0645574589148 145% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 11.7677419355 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 58.1214874552 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 10.9000537634 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 86.8835125448 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.