Some people suggest that each family should have one car and not encourage alternative vehicle. give your opinion.
The implication of family should have one car encourage alternative vehicle. Which is fairly debatable has now further attention from numerous arenas. The sizeable influence for this subject has generated controversy over the potential impact of this trend. I believe that family should have one car encourage alternative vehicle is good idea and this will be further discussed before reaching logical conclusion.
At the outset, There are diverse reasons why this subject is considered as vital, But the most conspicuous one stems from the fact that this is good thing and this can be contributing factor to one home one car is good because many cars many pollution for instance, a reaching invariably show that it would also have a sound pollution. Therefore, the negative impact of cannot be denied.
Nevertheless, some people adopt on opposing view and trend to believe that this thing is not good because vehicle helps us for going one place to another place can be addressed some position fact as well as there are innumerable facts in the favor of that the cars and other vehicles are spread dangerous diseases. But the most pre-dominant one stems from the fact that which is not only but also. As an illustration, finding some studies reveals that it is harmful. Hence the implication of is undeniable.
It can be concluded that cars and other vehicles are not beneficial
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 78, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... one car encourage alternative vehicle. Which is fairly debatable has now further att...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 194, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...g and this can be contributing factor to one home one car is good because many ca...
^^
Line 2, column 239, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[2]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun pollution seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much pollution', 'a good deal of pollution'.
Suggestion: much pollution; a good deal of pollution
... home one car is good because many cars many pollution for instance, a reaching invariably sho...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 319, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'sound pollution'.
Suggestion: sound pollution
...invariably show that it would also have a sound pollution. Therefore, the negative impact of cann...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 177, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... place to another place can be addressed some position fact as well as there are ...
^^
Line 3, column 270, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... facts in the favor of that the cars and other vehicles are spread dangerous dise...
^^
Line 3, column 394, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...rom the fact that which is not only but also. As an illustration, finding some studi...
^^^^
Line 3, column 469, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ome studies reveals that it is harmful. Hence the implication of is undeniable. It c...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, nevertheless, so, therefore, well, for instance, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.5418719212 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 6.10837438424 131% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 16.0 31.9359605911 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1155.0 1207.87684729 96% => OK
No of words: 230.0 242.827586207 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02173913043 5.00649968141 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89432290496 3.92707691288 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70342847508 2.71678728327 100% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 139.433497537 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.539130434783 0.580463131201 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 371.7 379.143842365 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.6157635468 43% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.71428571429 58% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 3.65517241379 27% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 99.4067526848 50.4703680194 197% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.0 104.977214359 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9090909091 20.9669160288 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.25397266985 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.33497536946 150% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 6.9802955665 57% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.249802885443 0.242375264174 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106096552498 0.0925447433944 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.155977439654 0.071462118173 218% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144291875172 0.151781067708 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.093757020195 0.0609392437508 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 12.6369458128 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.1260098522 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.9458128079 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 11.5310837438 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.32886699507 98% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 55.0591133005 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.94827586207 116% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => 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.