Cities are now expanding; the government should make better network for public transport or should build more roads to facilitate car ownership? Agree or Disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of expanding cities or making better network for public transport and its corresponding impact have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedure is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the government making better network for public transport can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, building more roads or facilitating car ownership can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that crucial issues, as well as ultimate outcomes, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic research which discovered the current policies. Thus, ramification of both common phenomenon and accordingly complicated phenomenon apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, facilitating car ownership or expanding cities might increase the consequence of critical issues. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university asserted the downsides of creative processes is correlated negatively with vital issues. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of this remarkable phenomenon.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of building more roads or making better network far outweigh the drawbacks. Not only due to the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of the total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues’ potential implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 20.9802955665 76% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 31.9359605911 85% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1479.0 1207.87684729 122% => OK
No of words: 258.0 242.827586207 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73255813953 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20803114922 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.639534883721 0.580463131201 110% => OK
syllable_count: 474.3 379.143842365 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.3130313406 50.4703680194 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.454545455 104.977214359 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4545454545 20.9669160288 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.54545454545 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.254033973484 0.242375264174 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0839898422164 0.0925447433944 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0942897190724 0.071462118173 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133552448987 0.151781067708 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0575783169541 0.0609392437508 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 12.6369458128 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.25 11.5310837438 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.65 8.32886699507 128% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 55.0591133005 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.