Cities are now expanding; the government should make a better network for public transport or should build more roads to facilitate car ownership? Agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of transportation development for expanding cities by government rather than facilitating roads network and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial numbers of individuals. I am inclined to believe that facilitating roads for car ownership by government can be a plus and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint building more roads for car ownership than making better transport network for expanding cities 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 experiment which discovered current policies. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both this common phenomenon and accordingly complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within a realm of public arena, government duty for make a better public transport network and road facilities might increase the consequences of critical needs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside 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 expanding cities and their needs for better transport network or road facilities far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues’ potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 299, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ighly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequ...
^^
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 : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 31.9359605911 88% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.75862068966 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1628.0 1207.87684729 135% => OK
No of words: 279.0 242.827586207 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.83512544803 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24788145684 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 139.433497537 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.641577060932 0.580463131201 111% => OK
syllable_count: 513.9 379.143842365 136% => 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: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.8917178149 50.4703680194 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.0 104.977214359 141% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.3636363636 20.9669160288 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.54545454545 7.25397266985 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => 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: 0.296149496713 0.242375264174 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0985259639508 0.0925447433944 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112660341075 0.071462118173 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16982726392 0.151781067708 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368389013561 0.0609392437508 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.8 12.6369458128 149% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 53.1260098522 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.89 11.5310837438 146% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.65 8.32886699507 128% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 55.0591133005 185% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => 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.