I disagree that there will be fewer cars twenty years from now. Cars have been around since the twentieth century, and even though technological improvements have been made, cars have remained a staple in our lives. In addition, technology would lower the cost to manufacture a car, allowing more people to afford one. Consequently, the economic progression of developing countries would provide a new demand for cars.
First of all, cars have been around for decades, and there is no sign that it would diminish from our lives. Even though there have been multiple technology advancements, there is still no substitute for cars. We need cars to save time in the fast-paced world. Cars let us get around faster and save time waiting. Though one would argue that a comprehensive public transport system would be a possible substitute for cars, it is still much slower than cars. Many people still rely on cars and taxis to quickly attend the next event on their schedules.
Furthermore, technology has allowed cheaper, more efficient and more eco-friendly cars to be manufactured. For example, companies such as Tesla are in the process of producing cheaper electric cars that would allow more people to afford a green vehicle. These developments are especially crucial in developing countries. For one thing, as these countries transform into industrialized countries, more and more people live far from where they work. Countries such as China and India have shown trends where people live in the suburbs and work in the city. Cheap cars would play an essential role in their lives as they need to get to work quickly, while having little money to spend. The number of cars would increase as more people afford cars. For another thing, technology could develop cars that are lower in carbon emissions. Currently, governments of developing countries have been carrying out measures to lower the amount of car exhaust. This means in the future, eco-friendly cars would allow for wider adoption.
In conclusion, there would be much more cars twenty years from now. Cars have been an essential part of our lives, and will continue to be in the next twenty years. Technological advancements have not yet come up with substitutes for cars, but rather provided more efficient and eco-friendly cars that could be used for widespread adoption.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
I disagree that there will be fewer cars...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...would provide a new demand for cars. First of all, cars have been around for ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d the next event on their schedules. Furthermore, technology has allowed chea...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cars would allow for wider adoption. In conclusion, there would be much more ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, furthermore, still, while, another thing, for example, in addition, in conclusion, such as, first of all, for another thing, for one thing
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 9.8082437276 163% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 43.0788530466 49% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 52.1666666667 84% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.0752688172 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1960.0 1977.66487455 99% => OK
No of words: 385.0 407.700716846 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09090909091 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4296068528 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71485857374 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 212.727598566 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.493506493506 0.524837075471 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 595.8 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.1344086022 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.8459197214 48.9658058833 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.2173913043 100.406767564 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7391304348 20.6045352989 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.13043478261 5.45110844103 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230795857883 0.236089414692 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0836714923347 0.076458572812 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109770548197 0.0737576698707 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180860012263 0.150856017488 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0912692455654 0.0645574589148 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 11.7677419355 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 58.1214874552 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 10.1575268817 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.01818996416 100% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 86.8835125448 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.0537634409 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.