People living in the 21st century have a better quality of life than the previous centuries. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In the current era of cut-throat completion, mundane strata are striving hard to achieve competitive standards of living. Masses dwelling in the present 21st century are enjoying more state-of-the-art amenities as compared to population in previous centuries. I completely agree to the notion and iit will be explained in detail in paragraphs below.
Firstly, it can be witnessed that the previous generations could afford fewer facilities in their mega families. This could be attributed to the lack of technology in that era along with limited income sources therein, that could hardly make their both ends meet. For instance, it costed an arm and a leg for the parents to bestow even basic toys to their children. Hence, strata in that particular time period remained aloof from the so-called standards of living and well-to-do facilities.
On the other hand, present day masses enjoy better facilities and smoother access to world class standards comparatively to the past generations. This transformation could be due to plethora of factors such as high earnings, globalization, latest technology and nuclear as well as micro families. The so called luxuries, for example car, are the necessities of present time to cope with accelerating world. Hence, people have uplifted their standards in terms of quality and need of the hour.
Recapulating the above statements, it obvious that mundane strata has adjusted their selves in the zone of high-end facilities in order to uplift and showcase the augmented quality of life amid competitive world; while the people in old times were deprived of these facilities, perhaps due to selected constraints of time in that period.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 239, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: ', the latest'.
Suggestion: , the latest
...ors such as high earnings, globalization, latest technology and nuclear as well as micro...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, hence, if, so, well, while, for example, for instance, such as, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1421.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 266.0 315.596192385 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34210526316 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03850299372 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94607584439 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.612781954887 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 436.5 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.5681502187 49.4020404114 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.416666667 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1666666667 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.126255960859 0.244688304435 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0434517341229 0.084324248473 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0500010485257 0.0667982634062 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0720741212318 0.151304729494 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0252437687405 0.056905535591 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: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.01 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.