Do you agree or disagree? Reading paper materials is better than electronic devices to gather information.
Smart electronic devices bring great convenience to us at the palm of our hands. A great number of people have embraced this information-gathering method while others still hold the ground that paper materials are better. I strongly support this transformation from paper materials to electronic devices due to the easier accessibility, more significant volume of information provided, and the eco-friendly outcome electronic devices can bring.
Undoubtfully, there is always a physical limitation and geological boundary if one insists on reading with paper materials. In China people used to describe a knowledgeable person with the phrase: "He/She possesses knowledge that is equivalent to five wagons of books." It is extremely difficult to travel around with all the heavy books around. Furthermore, even with the help of libraries facilitating people with great numbers of books. it is always a hassle to go back and forth from workplaces, homes, or schools to libraries. However, electronic devices, powered by the Internet, let people access datas and information whenever or wherever they go. Take Amazon Kindle as an example, once charged with full battery, this reading device can be put it in the pocket, stored in a packpack with ease and pretty much took anywhere anytime when someone have the need to read.
Furthermore, most electronic devices are powered by the Internet in contemparary settings. There is almost an unlimited amout of datas and information one can reach within a touch of his/her finger. The big tech company Google launched a project called Google books almost a decade ago. Scientist scanned and uploaded books from a couple of the most acknowledged libaries and this project still continues.
More importantly, reading or searching for information is very eco-friendly because books are made with papers and papers are made from trees. Even with the efforts of people recycling waste papers and reuse them into book manufacturing, the origin of the waste papers still requires forest destruction to some degrees. Electronic devices on the other hand free forest from there fate of extinction. Some may argue that electronic devices lifts the demand of electricity which also exhauses fossil feuls. To counter this disadvantage, a great number of countries have put significant efforts on the development of clean energy. We can confidently say that electronic devices using electricity can facilitate our effort of ecolofy protection in the long run.
To conclude, I will stand with my choice on taking electronic devices as information gathering tools out of the convinience they can bring, the number of information in provided compared with books, and the eco-friendly nature of them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 450, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...ing people with great numbers of books. it is always a hassle to go back and forth...
^^
Line 2, column 863, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'someone' must be used with a third-person verb: 'has'.
Suggestion: has
...much took anywhere anytime when someone have the need to read. Furthermore, most e...
^^^^
Line 4, column 410, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'argues'.
Suggestion: argues
...from there fate of extinction. Some may argue that electronic devices lifts the deman...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, however, if, may, so, still, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 15.1003584229 73% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 13.8261648746 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 43.0788530466 63% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 52.1666666667 123% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2313.0 1977.66487455 117% => OK
No of words: 428.0 407.700716846 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40420560748 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.548423998 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04442300642 2.67179642975 114% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 212.727598566 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558411214953 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 732.6 618.680645161 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 5.0 3.08781362007 162% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.1404683201 48.9658058833 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.65 100.406767564 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.6 5.45110844103 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24843608965 0.236089414692 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0760943107958 0.076458572812 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0661234767808 0.0737576698707 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151420962057 0.150856017488 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.082380091034 0.0645574589148 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 11.7677419355 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 58.1214874552 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.1575268817 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 10.9000537634 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.99 8.01818996416 112% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 86.8835125448 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.002688172 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.