As cities expanding, some people claim governments should look forward to creating better networks of public transportation available for everyone rather than building more roads for vehicle owning population. What’s your opinion? Give some examples or experience to support.
Recently, the phenomenon of expanding public transportation and its corresponding imacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the significance of complex proceduers is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and concequently positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that cities expanding can be a plus and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, creating better networks of public transportation can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that decreasing air pollution, 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 discoved current policies. Hence, beneficial ramifications of both urban bus and developing apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of a public arena, building roads for vehicle might increase the consequences of the traffic congestion. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by prestigious university has asserted that the downsides of creative processes is correlated negatively with private transportation. Thus, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of increaseing wasting time.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the beneficial of developing public transportation far outweigh its drawback. Not only do the advantages of this unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues' potential implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, 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 : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 20.9802955665 81% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 31.9359605911 85% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.75862068966 174% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1401.0 1207.87684729 116% => OK
No of words: 239.0 242.827586207 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.86192468619 5.00649968141 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 3.92707691288 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39741224637 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.686192468619 0.580463131201 118% => OK
syllable_count: 446.4 379.143842365 118% => 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: 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: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0551761675 50.4703680194 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.363636364 104.977214359 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7272727273 20.9669160288 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.09090909091 7.25397266985 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
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: 0.137632004788 0.242375264174 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0426884619178 0.0925447433944 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0519258721763 0.071462118173 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0710589738136 0.151781067708 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038014903514 0.0609392437508 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 12.6369458128 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 53.1260098522 47% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.71 11.5310837438 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.09 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 55.0591133005 176% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => 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.