The following argument was made in a newspaper editorial: "The autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders; if the number of illegal immigrants entering. Country cannot be checked, both it's economy and national indentity are endangered. Because illegal immigrants pose such threats, every effort must be made to return them to their country of origin"
The argument that the autonomy of a country is based on the strength of its borders; if the influx of illegal immigrants cannot be checked is not entirely cogent as the argument rests on certain assumptions that are not properly constructed.
To begin with, the argument presents a causal analogy, that the presence of illegal immigrants translates into endangering its economy and its national identity. However, on a closer look, the argument does not provide clear pieces of evidence, if any, on how this happens. What has been the economic situation in the past? How does that measure in comparison to what is obtainable at present and how does the presence of the immigrants allow for a strain on the country's economy and national identity?
Secondly, the argument fails to mention how it does not cater to its border porosity. What have been efforts made to check-mate the actions of immigration forces at the borders? Instead of investing resources to return them back to their country, which would also present a strain on the economy, what are the duties in ensuring that the entrance of such immigrants in the first place? Are there possibilities of graft?...do people pay their way in at checkpoints or are the manpower not enough to check these occurrences? All of these are what the assumptions made by the author fail to address.
On a final note, the argument also fails to address the possibilities of inadequacies in its policies. The surge of illegal immigrants might be due to intricacies in the normal migration policies of the country leading to damning escapades by prospective immigrants. By looking into the afore-mentioned scenario, the country assumes a position where it saves itself from unnecessary efforts which might be termed racist to return illegal migrants. This way, prospective immigrants would find it unnecessary going through illegal means.
Thus, the evidence provided so far to reach this conclusion has been proving unwarranted because of the assumptions already explained in the previous paragraphs.
Ultimately, the argument might have been strengthened if in making those assumptions, the author considers other factors that might be responsible for the presence of illegal immigrants in the country and efforts made to strengthen the border rather than a wild goose chase of repatriation.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 378 350
No. of Characters: 1919 1500
No. of Different Words: 188 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.409 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.077 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.856 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.625 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.086 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.337 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.603 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, thus, to begin with, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1978.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 377.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24668435013 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94348687684 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.501326259947 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 612.0 705.55239521 87% => 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: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.5410484943 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.625 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5625 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1875 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304454254758 0.218282227539 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0934029822834 0.0743258471296 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0875919713616 0.0701772020484 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157547662297 0.128457276422 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103323280928 0.0628817314937 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.