The tradition that family gets together to eat meals is disappearing. What are the reasons? What are the impacts on families and societies?

Traditionally families tend to gather at dining-room table during the meal time, which is an incredibly useful opportunity to cherish family values and, moreover, to bond stronger with each other. In most cases, this tradition is attributable to round-table discussions within the family. However, the custom is vanishing in the recent time, mostly due to appearance of other ways to feed well, especially outside the home, and the steering life. As a result, family values weaken and the gap between members widens.

Increasingly, the tradition of family occasions is disappearing primarily owing to spreading of small food outlets. For example, if a person is starving, they would rather purchase fast-cooked street food on the way. With the arrival to home, there would be thus no need in family feasts. Another contributing factor is hectic work schedule of members, which may not even coincide with each other. Buy a consequence, people are exhausted by intensive work and resort to prepared meals, trying to avoid cooking efforts as far as possible.

All these reasons are responsible for rise of various problems in family and society. Over centuries, Family Feud have been occasions for keeping some cultural traditions, in Eastern countries particularly. For instance, tea ceremony is the brightest custom where respect for older people is shown. Because of disappearing of traditional occasions, next generations may not experience such outstanding respectful attitude to work each other. Furthermore, trust and mutual understanding between members loosen. The opportunity to pass some values on to younger generation might be missed subsequently. Within the society, this directly affects establishing relationships between people and treatment of each other. For example, people can behave outrageously in the public places, in particular, when they eat out in restaurant.
On the whole, family traditions to get together is abandoning due to availability of fast food industry and strain in work. In the result, it leads to weaker relationships within the society and depreciation of family values. Nevertheless, if the awareness of this issue will be raised, the gravity of tradition will become even higher.

Votes
Average: 8.9 (1 vote)
Essays by the user:

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, in particular, as a result, in most cases, on the whole

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 24.0651302605 29% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 41.998997996 138% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1889.0 1615.20841683 117% => OK
No of words: 343.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50728862974 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30351707066 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03117277598 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609329446064 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 584.1 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.6267856622 49.4020404114 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.45 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.15 20.7667163134 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.9 7.06120827912 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 3.9879759519 251% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.204818817371 0.244688304435 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0578462691729 0.084324248473 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0637986068581 0.0667982634062 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128999737007 0.151304729494 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0540726392547 0.056905535591 95% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.0946893788 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.38 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.68 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 78.4519038076 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.