Whether designing of buildings will have a positive or negative impact on people's life and work?
Recently, the phenomenon of designing the buildings and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of the building structure is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the work environment can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, people's life can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of social life, as well as working activities, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the stone building. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both the perfect design and working conditions apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, people’s works might increase the consequence of the building industry, Moreover, fundamental aspects of life strategies could relate to this reality that the demerits of the design policies pertain to building studies. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of people responsibilities is correlated negatively with people studies. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of building requirements.
To conclude, while there are several arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of positive impacts on the working life far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of building improvements prove the significance of working processes, but also pinpoint the beautiful design implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... analyze that throughout this essay. From a social standpoint, peoples life c...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...g conditions apparently can be seen. Within the realm of science, people&apos...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ved notion of building requirements. To conclude, while there are several arg...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, 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: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 31.9359605911 100% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.75862068966 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1486.0 1207.87684729 123% => OK
No of words: 260.0 242.827586207 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.71538461538 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25693615782 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630769230769 0.580463131201 109% => OK
syllable_count: 459.9 379.143842365 121% => 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: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => 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: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.5079978938 50.4703680194 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.090909091 104.977214359 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6363636364 20.9669160288 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.25397266985 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.33497536946 56% => 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: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.355296434225 0.242375264174 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109836085965 0.0925447433944 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0533968004855 0.071462118173 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192109881905 0.151781067708 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0405257472213 0.0609392437508 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 12.6369458128 137% => 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: 16.19 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.61 8.32886699507 127% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 55.0591133005 174% => 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: 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.