Nowadays, people spend too much time at work to the extent that they hardly have time for their personal life.
Recently, the phenomenon of spending too much time at work by people nowadays and having no time for personal life and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of complex procedures is highly beneficial, this issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and consequently positive by a substantial implications of individuals. I am inclined to believe that hardworking people and their personal life can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, having not enough time for personal life and spending too much time at work can provide the society which 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 ramification of both this common phenomenon and accordingly complicated procedures apparently can be seen.
Within a realm of public arena, working too much time nowadays and its influence on people’s personal life 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 affecting personal life by spending too much time at work by people in modern life far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of unique phenomenon prove the significance of total outcomes, but also pinpoint thorny issues’ potential implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 358, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'implication'?
Suggestion: implication
... consequently positive by a substantial implications of individuals. I am inclined to believ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ted procedures apparently can be seen. Within a realm of public arena, working ...
^^^
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 : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 31.9359605911 103% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1585.0 1207.87684729 131% => OK
No of words: 284.0 242.827586207 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.58098591549 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16823738526 2.71678728327 117% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 139.433497537 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612676056338 0.580463131201 106% => OK
syllable_count: 510.3 379.143842365 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => 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: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5672242739 50.4703680194 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.083333333 104.977214359 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 20.9669160288 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.83333333333 7.25397266985 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => 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: 0.414465715704 0.242375264174 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136257683289 0.0925447433944 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.180550222614 0.071462118173 253% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253312726976 0.151781067708 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0763094981147 0.0609392437508 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 12.6369458128 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.38 11.5310837438 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.45 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 55.0591133005 185% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => 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.