There is no doubt about the importance of transportation nowadays. Some people believe that there will be a lot of cars in the streets, while others think the number of the cars will be decreased gradually. In my perspective, I predict fewer people will use their own cars in the future. In what follows, I will pinpoint the two most prominent rationals to elaborate this.
First of all, with advancement of technology, the need for being physically present at work will be depleted. Most of the employees will prefer to work from home, since they can have online meetings with their colleagues. Although the performance of the employees might be less, many companies will take this risk to decrease costs overall. As a result, using the cars will be much less over time. One month ago, I encountered an article which was about the relationship between working from home and employee satisfaction. The article concluded that most of the employees tend to prefer working while staying at home. Hence, the number of cars will be reduced.
Secondly, due to global warming, people will be forced to use fewer personal cars. As everybody knows, cars produce lots of air pollution. I strongly believe that people will take their responsibility to fight against climate changes more seriously. One of the deeds people will do is use public transportation and even carpool their cars with each other. In comparison, people use fewer cars than the past. So, we can safely predict that they will use fewer cars in the future.
Based on what is discussed, I strongly believe that there will be fewer cars in twenty years. It is mainly because with the advancement of technology, people will be able to work from home. Also, the situation of global warming will deteriorate and people will be obligated to use fewer cars.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, second, secondly, so, while, no doubt, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 9.8082437276 214% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 13.8261648746 22% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 43.0788530466 49% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 52.1666666667 88% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1511.0 1977.66487455 76% => OK
No of words: 308.0 407.700716846 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90584415584 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.48103885553 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65771494457 2.67179642975 99% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 212.727598566 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.512987012987 0.524837075471 98% => OK
syllable_count: 461.7 618.680645161 75% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.1344086022 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 25.888752384 48.9658058833 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 75.55 100.406767564 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.4 20.6045352989 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2 5.45110844103 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => 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: 0.439518724465 0.236089414692 186% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.162003194611 0.076458572812 212% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.116422471646 0.0737576698707 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.314240569113 0.150856017488 208% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0689993787332 0.0645574589148 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.4 11.7677419355 80% => 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: 10.9 10.9000537634 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.61 8.01818996416 95% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 86.8835125448 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.0537634409 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.247311828 78% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
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: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.