The author of the article discussed his suggestion that the Grandview Symphony can be totally self-supporting for recent developments. This policy can help to eschew financial expenditures. He based his opinion on based known facts: proliferating private contribution and increasing attendance which brought optimistic incomes. But his suggestion was still dubious and not convincing for ignoring tremendous other elements. To make his conclusion more concrete, he has to take into the considerations of the following questions.
First, he said that the investment of entertainment in the Grandview Symphony has expedited in last year. The most serious foible lies in the time span. There is little possibility for a company to double its funding in just that short time. The only possibly explanation can be a coincidence which can be that a famous institution wanted to goad the entertainment market so it just used prodigious investments to galvanize people awareness. There is another explanation that some famous star might attend that symphony which earned numerous exposure and gargantuan funds from advertisements. Whatever the situation was, the only question was the short time. After that fanatic atmosphere, this symphony market could possibly become frigid again which definitely needs the support from the government.
Second, this year’s Grandview Symphony attributed many audiences which brought a surge of incomes. This phenomenon was fallacious because concerts in this year were located in park which means this series were exactly gratuitous and brought no incomes. The park was the key element for attracting audiences. Many citizens are not likely to spare free money to attend a specific symphony because they can get access to music from many tunnels e.g., TV, the Internet and some free ceremonies. Does the ticket deserve its price? The author suggests to increase the price which is just facile for the above reasons. The next year’s situation could be less tickets sold than expectations. For these reasons, government cannot withdraw its funds when lacking insightful researches.
Third, the author insisted on lessening funds based on the assumption that these doubled funds or collected tickets’ income were enough. It was universally acknowledged that a symphony is very arduous and demanding which can hardly be afforded by private investors. The author just mentioned that the contributions doubled but ignored the key total number. Revealing this accurate number is very critical to gauge corresponding policy. But lack of fastidious investigations makes the author’s opinion unconvincing. This also applies the tickets’ suggestions. Raising from 10 dollars to 20 dollars doesn’t attenuate the quandary. So, to evaluate the possible solutions, a fussy account should not be disregarded.
In conclusion, the author said that some city commissioners suggest to withdraw funds for the symphony in the committee which is too half-baked and many realistic factors would hamper their idea.
- Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In dev 83
- Some people believe it is often necessary even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed 50
- Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr Karp an anthropologist Twenty years ago Dr Field a noted anthropologist visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rat 63
- In order to reverse the recent decline in our profits we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore s ten video rental stores Since we are famous for our special bargains raising our rental prices is not a viable way to improve profits Last mon 68
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 29 15
No. of Words: 463 350
No. of Characters: 2507 1500
No. of Different Words: 263 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.639 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.415 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.899 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 191 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 152 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 76 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.966 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.015 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.345 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.236 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.236 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.063 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 711, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...anatic atmosphere, this symphony market could possibly become frigid again which definitely ne...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 647, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun tickets is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ons. The next year’s situation could be less tickets sold than expectations. For the...
^^^^
Line 5, column 61, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'suggest withdrawing'.
Suggestion: suggest withdrawing
...uthor said that some city commissioners suggest to withdraw funds for the symphony in the committee...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, e.g., first, if, second, so, still, third, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 55.5748502994 68% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2576.0 2260.96107784 114% => OK
No of words: 461.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.58785249458 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63367139033 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98704073848 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568329718004 0.468620217663 121% => OK
syllable_count: 774.0 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 19.7664670659 147% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.0191289086 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.8275862069 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8965517241 23.324526521 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.55172413793 5.70786347227 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.245490866133 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0591748784906 0.0743258471296 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0683869959474 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138040976228 0.128457276422 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0493385038848 0.0628817314937 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 48.3550499002 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.85 12.5979740519 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 98.500998004 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.