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 public transportation networks in comparison with building roads and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of transportation development is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that transport infrastructures can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the social standpoint, public transportation for public safety can provide society with some noticeable effects which are in the fact that transport costs as well as road transportation. 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 transport requirements and legislations apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, road improvement for private cars might increase the consequences of traffic congestion. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of road improvements relate to this reality that the demerits of road accidents pertain to using private transports. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downsides of road construction projects are correlated negatively with being expensive. 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 improving public transportation network far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of road improvements prove the significance of public convenience, but also pinpoint transportation development implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ll analyze that throughout this essay. From the social standpoint, public trans...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d legislations apparently can be seen. Within the realm of science, road improv...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... notion of this remarkable phenomenon. To conclude, while there are several com...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, consequently, hence, if, moreover, 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 : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 5.75862068966 278% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1556.0 1207.87684729 129% => OK
No of words: 257.0 242.827586207 106% => OK
Chars per words: 6.05447470817 5.00649968141 121% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.56047500208 2.71678728327 131% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 139.433497537 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.649805447471 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 379.143842365 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => 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: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.1804014588 50.4703680194 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.666666667 104.977214359 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4166666667 20.9669160288 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 7.25397266985 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.33497536946 56% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 2.75862068966 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 2.91625615764 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178590094059 0.242375264174 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0631730238178 0.0925447433944 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518737294569 0.071462118173 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107028336894 0.151781067708 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0136366512499 0.0609392437508 22% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 12.6369458128 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 53.1260098522 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.81 11.5310837438 154% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.88 8.32886699507 131% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 55.0591133005 183% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.94827586207 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.5123152709 171% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 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.