The rise in popularity of skateboarding and decrease in number of shoppers in Central plaza is a topic of wide interest in recent times. There are those who assert that skateboarding increase has influenced people's desire to shop. There are also those who dispute that skateboarding has given rise to vandalism and littering and those who affirm it. There exist those who ineffectively argue that skateboarders are responsible for reducing the business of store owners in Central plaza.
Based on these premises, the author has concluded that prohibiting the skateboarders will be result in the drastic rise of business in Central plaza. Although the author's claim may well have merits, he has devised a poorly reasoned argument that is built upon several questionable premises that falls apart under high level of scrutiny. Based solely on the evidences at hand, the author's conclusion cannot be supported.
Primarily, the concern with author's reasoning is his baseless assumptions. The author has stated that when the number of skateboarders increased, the number of shoppers decreased. But the author fails to explain the tangible correlation between the increase of skateboarders and decrease of shoppers. Is skateboarding the only sole reason for decrease of shoppers? The author fails to consider various external factors that might have existed like inflation in prices, the quality of supply goods, the mind set of shoppers. The author undermines his argument by failing to expand the link between skateboarders and shoppers that he presumes to exist.
In addition to relying on unfounded hypotheses, the author camouflages his lack of irrefutable evidences by equivocating throughout his argument. The author claims that many shop owners have stated that the skateboarders were responsible for decrease in number of shoppers. But does this opinion reflects the opinions of all the shop owners of Central plaza? Has the author done any survey to support his claim. The author's use of unambiguous language like "predict" guarantees that scope and validity of the argument is obscure.
Furthermore, the author derives several baseless inferences that weakens the argument. The author has mentioned about the increase in vandalism and amount of litter throughout the plaza when the number of skateboarders increased. But he fails to provide a satisfactory correlation that indicates skateboarders are the guilty party. The author's premise over which the argument rests proves to be devoid of legitimate evidentiary support and thus rendering the argument a fallacy.
Ultimately, notwithstanding the dubious argument and logical fallacies, the author's claim may well have merit. If the author wants to strengthen his claim then he has to completely restructure his argument by conducting extensive research to collect irrefutable evidences, statistics that strengthens his issue. If the author fails to provides satisfactory evidence, his viewpoint will remain negated.
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 70
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the comp 34
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central 58
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and suppo 57
- The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal."A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situ 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 351, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... and littering and those who affirm it. There exist those who ineffectively argue tha...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 381, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ed solely on the evidences at hand, the authors conclusion cannot be supported. Prim...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 297, Rule ID: DOES_NP_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'reflect'?
Suggestion: reflect
...mber of shoppers. But does this opinion reflects the opinions of all the shop owners of ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 336, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'provide'.
Suggestion: provide
...thens his issue. If the author fails to provides satisfactory evidence, his viewpoint wi...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, if, may, so, then, thus, well, as to, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 13.6137724551 162% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2543.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 456.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57675438596 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0756209539 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478070175439 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 792.9 705.55239521 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 17.0 8.76447105788 194% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.5996404476 57.8364921388 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.72 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.24 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.92 5.70786347227 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184192163559 0.218282227539 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0662401276239 0.0743258471296 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0830282174855 0.0701772020484 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105088978228 0.128457276422 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0742150224751 0.0628817314937 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.5979740519 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 98.500998004 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: 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.