Whether design of buildings will have a positive or negative impact on people’s life and work?
Recently, the building design has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question ''Has it a positive or negative impact on people's life and work?". Whereas it is a widely held view that designing apartments has many positive effects on individuals, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the technical standpoint, better designing of buildings are bound up inextricably with people's mood, which indicates they lead to both architectural styles and tall buildings. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2014 demonstrates the relationship between the strong apartments and classical buildings as well as an exponential increase in modern cities. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far supports the contention that the likelihood of improving constructions is correlated positively with not only the people's lifestyle but also higher standards.
Within the realm of sociopsychology, without the slightest doubt, the high-rise building attribute to the city appearance, in that it would come down to traditional constructions, spectacular cities, and attracting tourists. A salient example of such attribution is the modern architecture, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take the computer simulation for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint the living standard problems. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal role of modern designs in people's behavior.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes, "all's well that ends well," after analyzing what elaborated above, I firmly believe that building design has significant impacts on people's life and work. However, with the benefit of hindsight, we conceive the more we research, the further we discover.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 571, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'peoples'' or 'people's'?
Suggestion: peoples'; people's
...correlated positively with not only the peoples lifestyle but also higher standards. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 79, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
...ing goes, 'alls well that ends well,' after analyzing what elaborated above,...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, however, if, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.5418719212 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 20.9802955665 95% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 31.9359605911 113% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1589.0 1207.87684729 132% => OK
No of words: 277.0 242.827586207 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73646209386 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23321831722 2.71678728327 119% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 139.433497537 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.682310469314 0.580463131201 118% => OK
syllable_count: 479.7 379.143842365 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.65517241379 192% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 44.9651839604 50.4703680194 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.454545455 104.977214359 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1818181818 20.9669160288 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.25397266985 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.334245439208 0.242375264174 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106097743969 0.0925447433944 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111471031869 0.071462118173 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.195254902419 0.151781067708 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125960666997 0.0609392437508 207% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.2 12.6369458128 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 53.1260098522 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.31 11.5310837438 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.09 8.32886699507 133% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => 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.