building more roads to allow more vehicle owner to improve the networks of public transport? agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of building more roads and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of network improvements is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that a capital city can be a plus, and I will analyse that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, the road transport industry can provide society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of the cosmopolitan city, as well as the urban structure, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered residential area and transportation system. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both public spaces and road transport apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, a road construction project might increase the consequences of public safety. Moreover, fundamental aspects of the faulty rail bridge could relate to this reality that the demerits of road bridge pertain to increase the risk of life. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of private cars is correlated negatively with the traffic jam. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of motorway traffic.
To recapitulate, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of the transportation far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of private transport prove the significance of transportation development, but also pinpoint social implications.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-18 | yasamin.gharib62 | 11 | view |
| 2018-04-26 | dhavalpatel095 | 85 | view |
- Advancement in medical technology is a boon or course? discuss. 85
- Whether design of the building will have a positive or negative impact on people’s life and work? give your opinion. 88
- sports, plating in a team or individual? what are the reviews and possible solutions for that? discuss. 88
- sports, playing in a team or individual? what are the reviews and possible solutions for that? discuss. 85
- More information available online so library's books are useless? Agree or disagree? 88
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 : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 31.9359605911 100% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1473.0 1207.87684729 122% => OK
No of words: 264.0 242.827586207 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57954545455 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29812457144 2.71678728327 121% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 139.433497537 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.647727272727 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 465.3 379.143842365 123% => 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: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => 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: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.431829807 50.4703680194 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.75 104.977214359 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.9669160288 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
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: 0.187417747015 0.242375264174 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0578340820107 0.0925447433944 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0541072422716 0.071462118173 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0946855661534 0.151781067708 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0348526244873 0.0609392437508 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 12.6369458128 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 11.5310837438 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.59 8.32886699507 127% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 55.0591133005 178% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.