In the modern day, a minority of metropolises build houses on a larger scale of land, whereas the rest choose to provide more skyscrapers in order to meet the need of the residents. To the best of my knowledge, I am in total approval of creating higher buildings due to its numerous merits. Both sides will be considered carefully before drawing to a conclusion.
To begin with, building houses on a wider area of land does have some valid reasons. One of them is for the safety of individuals. Taking having earthquakes for example, the residential evacuation wil be conducted more quickly in low construction compared to in skyscrapers. Therefore, some cities prefer shorter but wider houses than taller ones.
On the contrary, despite having a small number of downsides, building taller structure is believed to bring more benefits to both human beings and the environment. First of all, creating skyscrapers can save the budget of land for descendants. In the era of dramatic population increase, humans need more and more land for accommodation. Therefore, forests will be cut down for more room and following is a significant rise of global warming, which can have devastating impacts on humanity. To avoid this terrible issue is the second reason why cities should build skyscrapers rather than lower and wider houses.
In my opinion, not only creating higher construction can save the environment, but it also save sthe humankind thanks to its eco-friendly benefits. Our descendants in the future will have to suffer climate change desperately if the rise of deforestation keeps accelerating because of the need of more land. That's why we should save the budget of land by building more skyscrapers.
Having analysed all things above, I have a great belief that cities should provide higher edifices rather than lower but wider ones in order to preserve either nature or humanity. The more land we save, the better our offsprings' lives in the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 33, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
...nes. On the contrary, despite having a small number of downsides, building taller structure is...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 92, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'saves'?
Suggestion: saves
...n can save the environment, but it also save sthe humankind thanks to its eco-friend...
^^^^
Line 7, column 308, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...ating because of the need of more land. Thats why we should save the budget of land b...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, so, therefore, whereas, for example, first of all, in my opinion, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1647.0 1615.20841683 102% => OK
No of words: 324.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08333333333 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86885496968 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.555555555556 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 520.2 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.810114253 49.4020404114 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8823529412 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0588235294 20.7667163134 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.41176470588 7.06120827912 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.268131219518 0.244688304435 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0876935063602 0.084324248473 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0966686879374 0.0667982634062 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151215107016 0.151304729494 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0787586620896 0.056905535591 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 78.4519038076 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.