With the development of technology and science, some people believe that there is no great value of artists such as musicians and painters. What are the things artists can do but the scientist cannot? Why should we encourage the art area?
Recenty, the phenomenon of technology development and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate, Although contested by many that the matter of the art work is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that knowledgable scientists can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, the great artists can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of the role fo sientists, as well as the information technology, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, whenI wasa university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered professional artists. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both the artist management and the art gallary apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, scientist activities might increase the consequences of the space technology. Moreover, fundamental aspects of the primative art could relate to this reality that demerits of the scientist analysis pertain to amature artists. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertakenby a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of the role of scinetists is correlated negatively with the art technology. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of the scientist managements.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of encouraging the art far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of thechnological events prove the significance of scietist facts, but also pinpoint the artist improvements implications.
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 : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => 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: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1477.0 1207.87684729 122% => OK
No of words: 260.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.68076923077 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.33809595659 2.71678728327 123% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 139.433497537 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.65 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 379.143842365 124% => 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: 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: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6868704254 50.4703680194 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.272727273 104.977214359 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6363636364 20.9669160288 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.25397266985 96% => 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 : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.238292561331 0.242375264174 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722802060546 0.0925447433944 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.034199786379 0.071462118173 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120078769929 0.151781067708 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0118228226186 0.0609392437508 19% => 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: 17.1 12.6369458128 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.96 11.5310837438 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.09 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 55.0591133005 189% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.5 9.94827586207 206% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.