In many countries, traditional foods are being replaced by international fast foods. This is having a negative effect on both families and societies. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
In many parts of the world, local cuisines are being taken place by international junk foods. Many hold a belief that this phenomenon is adverse to both families and society. In my opinion, this point of view is grounded for the following reasons.
Firstly, it is noteworthy that the absence of traditional foods is one of contributive factors to the erosion of family solidarity. Nowadays, many sociological studies have shown that although it is invisible, having meals with preparing foods for beloved family members are bonding times that can help to build rapports in family. Therefore, it will be a grave mistake to neglect the fact that the increasing popularity of fast foods which are regarded for convenience has been accompanied by the loosen unity in family. For example, it is common that in contemporary society, double income families where both parents are bread-winners are more increasingly popular so the lack of home-makers and the lack of traditional foods have silently resulted in the fact that parents and children do not have bonding times, opportunities to share thoughts. This example is the illstrulation of the fact that the growing pervasiveness of fast foods have chronic effects on family unity.
Secondly, the counter-argument raised by objectors to this is that fast foods do no harm to society, but good to society. Because, in contemporary society, the fast pace of life has made people time-conscious, the consumption of fast foods which are prepared and readily available is time-efficient, satisfying the need of time-mind people, suitable to the ever-changing nature in human society. This argument could be true to some extent; however, it is incomplete. What they fail to take into account is the fact that the increasing prevalence of fast foods has been accompanied by the extinction of traditional foods, causing damage to the integrity of local cultures. This is due to the fact that traditional foods are integral parts of religious events, social occasions, ceremonies as cultural heritages. For this reason, the rare presence of traditional foods could be regarded as a worrying threat to national identities, cultural values.
In conclusion, negative effects of fast foods on both families and society could be seen from the view of family unity and cultural preservation as mentioned above.
- Many people believe that zoos have no purpose in today s world and should be closed What problems do zoos bring What are the alternatives to zoos if they are closed 78
- The chart below shows the results of a survey about people s coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in five Australian cities 78
- The two plans below show the Pancha village in 2005 and 2015 78
- The graph below shows the average number of Vietnamese students studying in France Russia and American between 2000 and 2015 49
- The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country Do the advantages outweigh this advantage 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 95, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hold seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many holds'.
Suggestion: Many holds
...aken place by international junk foods. Many hold a belief that this phenomenon is advers...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 494, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...for convenience has been accompanied by the loosen unity in family. For example, it is com...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 13.1623246493 198% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 7.30460921844 192% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1972.0 1615.20841683 122% => OK
No of words: 375.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25866666667 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40055868397 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04538003467 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 176.041082164 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512 0.561755894193 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 625.5 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => 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: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 71.0938034493 49.4020404114 144% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.466666667 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 20.7667163134 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.2 7.06120827912 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.44028398059 0.244688304435 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148074694252 0.084324248473 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0556580979171 0.0667982634062 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.260437129452 0.151304729494 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0256598322443 0.056905535591 45% => 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: 15.8 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 50.2224549098 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.4159519038 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.