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 public transportation and roads and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate.
Although contested by many that the matter of transporting is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the prohibition of using private cars can be a plus,
and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, road networks can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the matter of the merits, the overcrowded streets as well as overpopulation, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a
university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered road networks. Thus, beneficial ramifications of using the bus and other public vehicles apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, public transport might increase the consequences of a lack of accessibility. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of limitation in transports relate to this reality that the demerits of roads network pertain to lack of structure. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downsides of using private cars are correlated negatively with poor transportation. Hence, it is correct
to presume the preconceived notion of using private cars.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of using public transportation far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of road networks prove the significance of transporting, but also pinpoint comfortability implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 269, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ion of using private cars can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this ...
^^^
Line 6, column 276, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rding to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an acade...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, 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 : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.75862068966 174% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1489.0 1207.87684729 123% => OK
No of words: 262.0 242.827586207 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.68320610687 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.41620111306 2.71678728327 126% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.625954198473 0.580463131201 108% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 379.143842365 122% => 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: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.0749991748 50.4703680194 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.083333333 104.977214359 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8333333333 20.9669160288 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 8.0 4.12807881773 194% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
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: 0.130574548058 0.242375264174 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0444055291843 0.0925447433944 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0254894260016 0.071462118173 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0495473032631 0.151781067708 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360311006638 0.0609392437508 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 12.6369458128 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.66 11.5310837438 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.4 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 55.0591133005 173% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 84.4444444444 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.0 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.