Should the government build more roads to allow more vehicle owner or improve the network of public transport?
Recently, the phenomenon of country-wide road development programs and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of building more roads is highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that safe and secure road can be plus and I will scrutinize that throughout this essay.
From a general standpoint, Improvement of public transportation can provide the society with some noticeable effects which rooted in the fact that the merits of infrastructure development, as well as safe travelling, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment, which discovered the notable results of eco-society growth in the case of upgraded the network of public transit. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both accessible overcrowding areas and facilitated streets apparently can be seen.
On the other hand, within the realm of science, increasing of vehicle owners might increase the consequence of environmental effects. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of fossil fuel consumption rate would relate to this reality that the demerits of air pollution pertain to non-renewable natural sources. As an example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of over-loud roads is correlated negatively with traffic jam. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of the polluted city and urban spaces.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of promoting the network of public transportation facilities far weigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of communal developed path-ways prove the significance of easy-drive high ways, but also pinpoint long-term implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as, on the other hand
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 : 7.0 8.36945812808 84% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 31.9359605911 125% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.75862068966 208% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1655.0 1207.87684729 137% => OK
No of words: 289.0 242.827586207 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.72664359862 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.33085918484 2.71678728327 123% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 139.433497537 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.678200692042 0.580463131201 117% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 379.143842365 138% => 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: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0321851983 50.4703680194 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.916666667 104.977214359 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 20.9669160288 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.25397266985 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178819614025 0.242375264174 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0460191654658 0.0925447433944 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0428181256418 0.071462118173 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0833929184576 0.151781067708 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0270769815372 0.0609392437508 44% => 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: 17.6 12.6369458128 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 53.1260098522 57% => 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: 16.25 11.5310837438 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.11 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 55.0591133005 209% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => 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.