The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of Excello Food Markets.
"In 90 towns where Excello has food markets, natural-food stores specializing in organic food products — products containing no chemical preservatives and made with foods grown without pesticides — have opened nearby as competitors. Surveys of our own customers reveal a growing concern about foods grown using pesticides or preserved with chemicals. Recently our market in Sun City participated in a local food tasting fair, and 75 percent of the fair goers who visited the Excello booth requested free samples of organic fruit. Such evidence indicates that to increase our profits, we should begin to stock a full line of organic food products in all our markets."
The author of this analytical piece argues that to increase profits, Excello should begin to stock a full line of organic food products in all their markets. Though, there are several key factors that are missing with the help of which evaluation would become easy. However, on careful scrutiny, it shows the evidence provides little credible support to the argument of the author. Hence, the argument of the author is incomplete and unsubstantiate.
Firstly, it is mentioned in the contention that the survey of customers shows growing concern about foods grown using the pesticides or preserved with chemicals. This raises some questiones like What are the basis of those surveys? Where was the survey done? Was it done in the area where the people in the field of the organic food resided or any other place? What were the number of people this survey encountered with? Thus, this questions must be answered by the author so that, the proper assessment of the argument can be done.
Secondly, it is stated that in food tasting fair in the Sun City, 75 percent fair goers asked for the free samples of the organic food. This raises many querries like What was the exact number of the fair goers? Was the tasting fair related to the organic food or not? These questoins must be answered by the author to help assess the argument. Also, it might be possible that those 75 percent people might have confused Excello with the organic food stall. Thus, these querries must be cleared by the author.
Thirdly, it is assumed that as in the Sun City, there is increasing demand at all the 90 places, where there are Excello food markets. But, there are no statements to support this contention of the author. This, assumption is made out of the blue. Also, it is not mentioned clearly that Does the increasing demand of the organic food product is at all the places or only at Sun City? Therefore, there are further more questions that author needs to answer first.
To sum up, the argument of the author is unpersuasive. To bolster it further, the auhtor must provide clear and concrete evidence, perhaps by the way of detailed analysis of whether the rise in organic food demand is at how many places and what is the rise in the demand? Thus to better evaluate the survey, it would be necessary to provide more information on the rise in demands and places where the rise in demands occur.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 159, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Though” 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.
...nic food products in all their markets. Though, there are several key factors that are...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 273, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ces and what is the rise in the demand? Thus to better evaluate the survey, it would...
^^^^
Line 5, column 426, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...places where the rise in demands occur.
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'firstly', 'hence', 'however', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'therefore', 'third', 'thirdly', 'thus', 'by the way', 'to sum up']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.227956989247 0.25644967241 89% => OK
Verbs: 0.154838709677 0.15541462614 100% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0731182795699 0.0836205057962 87% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0430107526882 0.0520304965353 83% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0215053763441 0.0272364105082 79% => OK
Prepositions: 0.122580645161 0.125424944231 98% => OK
Participles: 0.047311827957 0.0416121511921 114% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.37713346067 2.79052419416 85% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0236559139785 0.026700313972 89% => OK
Particles: 0.00215053763441 0.001811407834 119% => OK
Determiners: 0.139784946237 0.113004496875 124% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0215053763441 0.0255425247493 84% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0279569892473 0.0127820249294 219% => Maybe 'Which' is overused. If other WH_determiners like 'Who, What, Whom, Whose...' are used too in sentences, then there are no issues.
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2397.0 2731.13054187 88% => OK
No of words: 418.0 446.07635468 94% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73444976077 6.12365571057 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52162009685 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.332535885167 0.378187486979 88% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.241626794258 0.287650121315 84% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.136363636364 0.208842608468 65% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0717703349282 0.135150697306 53% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37713346067 2.79052419416 85% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 207.018472906 93% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.461722488038 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 50.0941257225 52.1807786196 96% => OK
How many sentences: 24.0 20.039408867 120% => OK
Sentence length: 17.4166666667 23.2022227129 75% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.56032326 57.7814097925 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.875 141.986410481 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4166666667 23.2022227129 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.625 0.724660767414 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.58251231527 84% => OK
Readability: 41.5793460925 51.9672348444 80% => OK
Elegance: 1.8137254902 1.8405768891 99% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.345402948045 0.441005458295 78% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.123657120658 0.135418324435 91% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0962575633762 0.0829849096947 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.582424819307 0.58762219726 99% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.126625685656 0.147661913831 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.139980935023 0.193483328276 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0842407448793 0.0970749176394 87% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.489665866615 0.42659136922 115% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0704875734917 0.0774707102158 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253680643879 0.312017818177 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0187825799399 0.0698173142475 27% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.33743842365 168% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 9.0 6.46551724138 139% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 14.657635468 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.