Nowadays families do not usualy eat meals together. Why? and is this a negative or positive development?
Back in the day, meals were considered precious moments for all family members to gather around. Nonetheless, the undeniable fact puts forward that there has been a tendency for individuals living in accommodations to have feasts separately. Indubitably, this practice contains both benefits and drawbacks, but from my perspective, the flaws totally prevail over the advantages, thus making the habit a negative trend.
I believe there are two causes for this disposition. This is first and foremost because of the lack of time. To be precise, most family members are engaged in some unavoidable work at each mealtime. For example, the children might have to be at their school during the family’s breakfast, and most family members have their food at their respective places of work or study at lunch. The only time they are available together these days is at dinner, and at that period, some family members might still be at work. Another reason why this happens is because of the growing popularity of fast, convenience, or junk food. Family members now have the option of instant food delivery system, and they do not necessarily leave their stomachs empty to wait for mealtime. For instance, the mentioned food delivery system is efficient enough to serve food even at midnight, and believe it or not, at that time, customers have the privilege of choosing from a range of options.
Melancholy as it is, the habit of eating separately can lead to several disadvantageous developments for them. First of all, a lot of households have their own preferences for ingredients, flavor, and cooking. If truth be told, when the family assembles for the meals, the habitual repetition is constantly maintained. However, when individuals possess distinctive time of eating, this quotidian biological routine might suffer negative changes as the family members are discouraged from preparing meals. This then triggers a bad habit of eating improperly, resulting in detrimental effects on health. Secondly, gathering around for feasts is also a way to connect people and to release the stress that was bottled up during the day since one can let others know about the incidents that happened. Hence, without this daily activity, neither don’t they have anyone to confide in nor possess the ability to seek someone to empathize with them when encountering hardship. As a result, this can make individuals feel very isolated and raise their vulnerability to mental health problems.
In conclusion, it is obvious that the two major reasons behind the decline in the frequency of family meals are lack of time and changing lifestyle. Consuming food together plays a crucial role in well-being and mental health, and these long-term effects can clearly outweigh the slight convenience of eating separately. Thus, gathering around the table for dinner should be trained into a regular habit so that everyone can be healthy not only physically but also mentally.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-13 | phamkhuyen | 73 | view |
| 2023-11-09 | phamkhuyen | 73 | view |
| 2023-09-11 | transcendenceeee | 73 | view |
| 2023-08-04 | pwlihnkt | 89 | view |
| 2023-07-29 | quan12341234 | 61 | view |
- Some people laws should be passed to assess what nutrition and food choices to improve public health Others think it is wrong Discuss both views and give your opinion 84
- Although many people value their public parks this space could be better used for other purposes such as residential areas for the ever growing population or to develop business and boost economies To what extent do you agree or disagree with this 78
- Some people think that big companies should provide sports and social facilities for the local community To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- In some countries small town centre shops are going out of business because people tend to drive to large out of town stores As a result people without cars have limited access to out of town stores and it may result in an increase in the use of cars Do y 84
- Every day millions of tons of food are wasted all over the world Why do you think this is happening And how can we solve this problem 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, still, then, thus, well, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 13.1623246493 175% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 10.4138276553 173% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 41.998997996 155% => 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: 2488.0 1615.20841683 154% => OK
No of words: 477.0 315.596192385 151% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21593291405 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67336384929 4.20363070211 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79352130452 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 271.0 176.041082164 154% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568134171908 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 775.8 506.74238477 153% => 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: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 0.809619238477 988% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 16.0721442886 137% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.075299244 49.4020404114 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.090909091 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6818181818 20.7667163134 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.9879759519 251% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174517733772 0.244688304435 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0530180916897 0.084324248473 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0343544834817 0.0667982634062 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100387065084 0.151304729494 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0157650289416 0.056905535591 28% => 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: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 78.4519038076 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.