In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
People have different views regarding high-speed trains among cities. Several folks state that governments ought to spend a large amount of income on building fast trains. While other people claim that this money would rather spend on the improvement of previous public transport means. In this essay, I will negotiate both views and state my own opinion.
On the one hand, some people believe that the construction of high-speed trains will contribute to more safety and efficiency in our day-to-day lives. The strongest argument is that commuters working in other cities could enter and leave cities much faster at peak hours by using fast trains. For example, inhabitants have never faced traffic congestion in Switzerland, since the key transport mode among cities is high-speed trains. In the same way, conductors of fast speed trains are professionals. Consequently, the probability of accidents has decreased in the roads, as well as has declined traffic jams during rush hours because of well-qualified drivers.
On the other hand, several people suppose that governments have to care more concerning the modernisation of previous public transport. First of all, authorities might renovate paths and roads, update public transport means, such as buses, trains and ferries. In addition, if power institutions industrialise the existing public transport system by decreasing the price of tickets, it will be more affordable for ordinary folks. Over the last few years, for instance, the government of Estonia has invested a large amount of money to the public transport system in the capital making all public transport means free to inhabitants.
In conclusion, for the reasons mentioned above, I believe that the construction of fast speed trains and the development of public transport both are beneficial and important in trying to make a more convenient and effective travelling between cities.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-20 | MinyiChu | 67 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 61 | view |
| 2024-02-03 | Wardiati Yusuf | 67 | view |
| 2023-12-30 | Tường Vân | 73 | view |
- The first chart below shows how energy is used in an average Australian household. The second shows the greenhouse gas emissions which result from this energy use. 61
- The graph below shows the quantities of goods transported in the UK between 1974 and 2002 by four different modes of transport.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The diagram below shows how geothermal energy is used to produce electricity 73
- The chart below shows the percentage of households in owned and rented accommodations in England and Wales between 1918 and 2011.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 84
- Some people believe that teenagers should concentrate on all subjects. Others believe that teenager should focus on that subject in which they are more interested. Discuss of both opinion. 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 173, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ount of income on building fast trains. While other people claim that this money woul...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 253, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nd effective travelling between cities.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, if, regarding, so, well, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as well as, first of all, in the same way, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1618.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 297.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44781144781 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88599527015 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 176.041082164 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.56228956229 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 475.2 506.74238477 94% => 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: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.110541072 49.4020404114 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.571428571 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2142857143 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.0 7.06120827912 184% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.295073754965 0.244688304435 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0956023810142 0.084324248473 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0633044843607 0.0667982634062 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180955710779 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0458326623139 0.056905535591 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => 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: 14.33 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.