In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County last year lowered its
speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour on all county highways. But this
effort has failed: the number of accidents has not decreased, and, based on
reports by the highway patrol, many drivers are exceeding the speed limit.
Prunty County should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement
project that Butler County completed five years ago: increasing lane widths,
resurfacing rough highways, and improving visibility at dangerous
intersections. Today, major Butler County roads still have a 55 mph speed
limit, yet there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County
this past year than there were five years ago.
The following argument concludes that Prunty County should "undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago" because they attempt to improve highway safety failed. This conclusion may true, but several flaws in the argument make it sounds unconvincing. The unwarranted assumption that argument is based on such as changing Prunty County project will improve highway safety, decrease accident in Butler County just because of their project and employ Butler County's project will improve highway safety in Prunty County, rendering the Argument logically flawed.
Firstly, the author state that because of, many drivers are exceeding the speed limit and the number of accidents has not decreased attempt to improve highway safety in Prunty County failed and another project must undertake. Logically one concludes that because of the law did not apply correctly the attempt failed and the petrol must control the drivers in order to respect exceeding the speed limit, instead of undertaking another project. In fact, if the drivers exceeded the speed limit, it would be surprising that the number of accident change. The argument would have further proved why the effort failed in order to convince that another project must undertake.
Secondly, the argument claimed that "there was 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago" because of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago. A lot of variables may affect this year’s reported accidents than five years ago. Such as increasing car safety, decreasing population, increase the maturity of drivers and so on. For example, if the population of The City decreases during five years the rate of the accident will decrease too. The author would have proved that the main reason for this year’s fewer reported accident than five years ago was the road improvement project in Butler County.
Finally, the given argument concedes that "Prunty County should undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago" because that project redounds to Butler County has the fewer reported accident this year. One plane that works in one city this can not be worked in other cities. Every city has special characteristics that base on them the plan must be designed. For instance, in Kabul's street drivers did not attend to traffic light and there must be a traffic officer in order to obey them. so one cannot conclude that in all city in the world must traffic officers present in streets. In order to make author's stand stronger. the argument would have proved that one project that in Butler County was successful would be successful in Prunty County too.
In summary, the argument is not convincing at all. unwarranted assumption such as one project can have the same result in both cities, and decreasing accident in Butler County just because of their project, are the all serious consideration that must be determined before drawn conclusion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 548, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: So
... traffic officer in order to obey them. so one cannot conclude that in all city in...
^^
Line 4, column 684, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...n order to make authors stand stronger. the argument would have proved that one pro...
^^^
Line 5, column 52, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Unwarranted
... the argument is not convincing at all. unwarranted assumption such as one project can have...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 291, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... be determined before drawn conclusion.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, for example, for instance, in fact, in summary, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2612.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 493.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29817444219 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54729264308 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.403651115619 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 802.8 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.12305853 57.8364921388 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.380952381 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4761904762 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.95238095238 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221322630993 0.218282227539 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0743704455142 0.0743258471296 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0743163432222 0.0701772020484 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14130942247 0.128457276422 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0601083501987 0.0628817314937 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.88 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.