agree or disagree: keep older friends or make new ones
The time one spends with other people is one the most crucial periods in life; as communication leads one to learn lots of diverse experiences and shape the ensuing life. Hence, one of the highly controversial issues among many individuals is whether to stay with older friends or to make new friends. As far as I am concerned, in a state of ambivalence, I might lean toward being with older friends. Conceivably, some people believe that we should find new friends, however, many reasons such as strong relationship and reliability, which are paramount points in friendship, can declare the higher beneficiary of keeping older friends. I will interpret my response in the following essay.
First, strong relationships with others are advantageous due to the valuable interactions that included strong bonds. Doubtlessly, such interactions help to broaden the friendship and learn divergent aspects of a friend. Consequently, this will enrich one’s communication. To build strong bonds one needs to learn many aspects of another person; aspects such as the behavior, family relationships, favorites, etc. which cannot be learned in a brief amount of time. Granted these pieces of information contribute to the strength of a relation, but short relation cannot provide them. As an illustrative example, some years ago, during my high school time at the Beheshti high school in Iran, there was a girl, called Sara, Sara had an allergy to mango. Sara’s new friend held a party for her birthday, serving a mango cake, not knowing about the possible-allergic reaction. In the beginning, everyone thought this would be a fantastic party but this was not true. Unfortunately, Sara had to go to the hospital upon eating the cake, and it was her worst birthday. Although the party was meant to strengthen their relationship, things did not go well due to the lack of knowledge. As one can see, to make strong relations, one needs much information about friends and information obtainment associated with the time.
Also, it is not presumptuous to judge another’s reliability according to the shared social activities. No man can ever truly understand an other’s mind-set, but a man can be more reliable after a certain of shared activities. Two people who appear comfortably talking may have spent the majority of their time together. There are times when a friend is more reliable than the family. My personal experiences are the foundation of my point. A person needs some reliable person to talk about sad experiences and the amount of spent time directly influences the friendship reinforcing that is imperative for reliability most of the time. Surely, it must be wiser to respect old relations than to deny that anyone needs a reliable person to endure hardship.
I am of the conviction that everyone needs strong relationships, people with whom you share a lot with, a reliable person. This is a personal suggestion and the effect benefits, communication skills and enduring sad times. Regarding the aforementioned reasons, I conclude that a longer relationship, with an older friend, is a better choice. All in all, a coin has two sides and an edge to connect them; so, we need new friends in the first place to achieve a longer friendship.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-25 | pezhmanlamei | 73 | view |
| 2023-12-13 | jimHsu | 76 | view |
| 2023-12-07 | butterflyluo | 80 | view |
| 2023-12-07 | butterflyluo | 66 | view |
| 2023-12-07 | butterflyluo | 66 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, then, well, such as, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 15.1003584229 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 13.8261648746 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 52.1666666667 127% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2736.0 1977.66487455 138% => OK
No of words: 533.0 407.700716846 131% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13320825516 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80487177365 4.48103885553 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06418794067 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 284.0 212.727598566 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.532833020638 0.524837075471 102% => OK
syllable_count: 834.3 618.680645161 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.6003584229 136% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.6996519097 48.9658058833 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.7142857143 100.406767564 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0357142857 20.6045352989 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.96428571429 5.45110844103 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 11.8709677419 160% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
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: 0.184262139893 0.236089414692 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0465377055237 0.076458572812 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0691318059397 0.0737576698707 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119461100945 0.150856017488 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0879611436293 0.0645574589148 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 11.7677419355 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 58.1214874552 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.1575268817 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.01818996416 104% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 86.8835125448 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.002688172 150% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.