An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
The argument contends that in order to handle the vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should promote a new type of millet. While supporting the argument, the writer is based on numerous assumptions that cannot be taken for granted. Thus, further evidence needs to be corroborated to claim the statement.
Firstly, the author assumes that a new breed of millet high in Vitamin A indicates a perfect key to solve the deficiency of vitamin A. However, it may not be the case. The author is being cursory of the situation where promoting a new breed could backfire the current situation. There could be even more serious outcomes resulting from a new breed. Therefore, further evidence pertaining to the side effects the new breed could carry should be examined in order to firmly state the author's contention.
Secondly, while the author assumes that with the government subsidy, the farmers' work will be profitable, it is not conclusively proven to be true. The recommendation above states that subsidies will overcome the cost for the new type of millet. However, the subsidy could not cover the cost. There could be other consequences that is not to be resulted and to cover those results could cost substantial amount of money that the subsidy given is not enough. As such, more detailed evidence pertaining to the relatively low cost of the breeding of a new sort of millet should be corroborated to make the recommendation's decision.
Lastly, the author falsely assumes that the new variety of millet will be of high demand. The residents, residing in the nation of Tagus whose staple food have been millet, could not be willing to consume more kinds of millet because of boredom for consuming the same kind of food. Or, what's even worse is that due to the impoverished situation in Tagus, people could have emigrated to other places to evade the deficiency of vitamin A. In these cases, no matter how hard the government tries to promote the new type of millet, there would be no consequences. Therefore, the author needs to confirm the demand of the new type of millet before executing the decision.
In summary, the author's statement cannot stand solely by its current form. Further evidence pertaining to whether there are no side effects of the new type of millet, the cost of promoting new breed, and the demand for the new variety should be corroborated in order to contend as the way the recommendation state
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Let's analyze the structure of the statement and argue accordingly:
condition 1:
While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. //your argument 2
condition 2:
Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. //maybe people don't like the taste
conclusion:
To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet. //your argument 3 but more
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 413 350
No. of Characters: 1978 1500
No. of Different Words: 175 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.508 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.789 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.641 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 141 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 101 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 62 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.944 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.793 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.371 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.576 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.099 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The argument contends that in order to h...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...orroborated to claim the statement. Firstly, the author assumes that a new b...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 488, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e examined in order to firmly state the authors contention. Secondly, while th...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...irmly state the authors contention. Secondly, while the author assumes that ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... make the recommendations decision. Lastly, the author falsely assumes that ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 292, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...or consuming the same kind of food. Or, whats even worse is that due to the impoveris...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...llet before executing the decision. In summary, the authors statement cannot...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 23, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...the decision. In summary, the authors statement cannot stand solely by its cu...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 82, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Further,
...annot stand solely by its current form. Further evidence pertaining to whether there ar...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'firstly', 'however', 'lastly', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'therefore', 'thus', 'while', 'in summary', 'kind of', 'sort of']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.247807017544 0.25644967241 97% => OK
Verbs: 0.160087719298 0.15541462614 103% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0855263157895 0.0836205057962 102% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0548245614035 0.0520304965353 105% => OK
Pronouns: 0.00657894736842 0.0272364105082 24% => Some pronouns wanted.
Prepositions: 0.118421052632 0.125424944231 94% => OK
Participles: 0.0526315789474 0.0416121511921 126% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.70747006472 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0416666666667 0.026700313972 156% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.127192982456 0.113004496875 113% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0416666666667 0.0255425247493 163% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0109649122807 0.0127820249294 86% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2467.0 2731.13054187 90% => OK
No of words: 413.0 446.07635468 93% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97336561743 6.12365571057 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.57801047555 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.348668280872 0.378187486979 92% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.26392251816 0.287650121315 92% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.1598062954 0.208842608468 77% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.108958837772 0.135150697306 81% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70747006472 2.79052419416 97% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 207.018472906 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.438256658596 0.469332199767 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 46.9280346823 52.1807786196 90% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.039408867 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.65 23.2022227129 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5282495148 57.7814097925 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.35 141.986410481 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.65 23.2022227129 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.7 0.724660767414 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 3.58251231527 251% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 47.042251816 51.9672348444 91% => OK
Elegance: 1.89108910891 1.8405768891 103% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.463745092915 0.441005458295 105% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.132023139452 0.135418324435 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0870584336147 0.0829849096947 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.61981964704 0.58762219726 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.130594165175 0.147661913831 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.214262523354 0.193483328276 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.118887782347 0.0970749176394 122% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.584183226307 0.42659136922 137% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.049510235998 0.0774707102158 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.356494198761 0.312017818177 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0649148483191 0.0698173142475 93% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.87684729064 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.82512315271 145% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 2.82389162562 248% => OK
Total topic words: 20.0 14.657635468 136% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.