Should library use digital gadgets to provide information on different topics? pros and cons
The importance of library use digital gadgets which was always debatable has now become more controversial with many people claiming that is beneficial while other reject this notion. This essay will further elaborate both aspects of this trend and this will lead to a logical conclusion.
There are myriad of reason which will further explain this argument but the most preponderant stems from the fact that library use digital gadgets to provide information to people is beneficial in many sector as well as useful and helpful for next generation and with the help of modern gadgets we can save time and energy at library and easily find any book according to our choice. Another pivotal aspect for the argument is that all universities should provide modern gadgets in library as well as many foreign countries only provide digital technology in their library. Needless to say all these merits stand library use digital gadgets in a good stead.
However, there are some pitfalls that negate this argument and which can certainly overwhelm the potential influence of this trend but the most alarming is that when digital technology provide information than books popularity decrease as well as there are lots of new aspirates who do not want modern technology in library as well as modern technology vanishing ordinary book's from library. It is apparent why many are against to library use digital gadgets.
According to the argument aforementioned above, one can reach a conclusion that the benefits of library use digital gadgets are instrumental indeed. Nevertheless the potential drawbacks should not be overlooked either.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 198, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun sector seems to be countable; consider using: 'many sectors'.
Suggestion: many sectors
... information to people is beneficial in many sector as well as useful and helpful for next ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 150, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Nevertheless,
...igital gadgets are instrumental indeed. Nevertheless the potential drawbacks should not be o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, look, nevertheless, so, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 6.10837438424 131% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 31.9359605911 81% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1376.0 1207.87684729 114% => OK
No of words: 262.0 242.827586207 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25190839695 5.00649968141 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66362995519 2.71678728327 98% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 139.433497537 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530534351145 0.580463131201 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 445.5 379.143842365 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.6157635468 43% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.71428571429 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 3.65517241379 27% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 12.6551724138 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 20.5024630542 141% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 118.845371059 50.4703680194 235% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 152.888888889 104.977214359 146% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.1111111111 20.9669160288 139% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.77777777778 7.25397266985 93% => 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 : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.31636660253 0.242375264174 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.150751701075 0.0925447433944 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0779352402887 0.071462118173 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.195818846027 0.151781067708 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0897814158963 0.0609392437508 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 12.6369458128 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 11.5310837438 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.32886699507 104% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 55.0591133005 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 9.94827586207 196% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.3980295567 131% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.5123152709 133% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.4444444444 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 71.5 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.