The author in an argument predicts that in order to increase profit even more dramatically, we should restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex. The author’s main conclusion based in an assumption that when first three buildings of the complex were modified to restrict maximum flow to bout one -third for one month, no complaints with showers have been registered, while complaints only about low water pressure. Moreover, the author assumes that the adjustment will obviously ensue in a considerable saving for SunnySide Corporation. The argument consist of many unanswered question, and hence leads to dubious level. Also, there is lack of evidences to draw a valuable conclusion of an argument. The argument has several serious flaws in it.
Firstly, the author’s prediction is baseless and lack of cogent evidences. The author predicts that the adjustment will clearly result in a considerable saving for Sunnyside Corporation, because of the corporation pays for water each month. Prediction seems something baseless because there is unavailability of actual reading data before and after one month. It may be a case that instead of reducing water flow to one-third. is increased due to certain external factors which are excluded by the author while prediction and hence, may be a possibility that conclusion does not sounding trustworthy. Also, the author uses correlation proves causality without considering essential factors.
Secondly, the author says that no complaints have been registered regarding showers and only complaints about low water pressure. The author fails to consider possibility that the people in complex may lax and hence they showed hesitancy toward filing complaints about shower in the complex and others which have problem regarding low pressure filed their complaints as they were responsible persons in a society. If there is clearity regarding nature of people in the Sunnyside Corporation, it may easy to predict relevant conclusion of an argument.
Final but not least, the author uses fallacy “ Because of this, therefore, after this” and also wrongly assumes that one thing applicable on one building will necessary effective to other building. We know that as a building varies, it nature of people living in it their population, reponsibilities also varies. Therefore, it is baseless to predict that all twelve buildings should accept such tact as their water usage may varies according too building.
In conclusion, an argument consists of many unanswered questions and hence, it seems to dubious. Moreover, the author assumes that one strategy effective to one building necessarily effective to other one without considering population, characteristics and amenities of different buildings. In addition, the author fails to consider nature of the people in the complex that how responsible persons are they toward filing complaint regarding water problems. The author can make his position in an argument compelling and well sounding by rendering details about nature of people, their population in all buildings, similarity between buildings, providing actual readings of water supply before and after adjustment, etc.
- “Youth is wasted on the young”Agree or Disagree 73
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field. 50
- Some people prefer to work for themselves or own a business. Others prefer to work for an employer. Would you rather be self-employed, work for someone else, or own a business? Use specific reasons to explain your choice. 73
- Some people believe that society should try to save every plant and animal species, despite the expense to humans in effort, time, and financial well-being. Others believe that society need not make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in mon 66
- The following appeared in a recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis."Ten years ago, as part of a comprehensive urban renewal program, the city of Transopolis adapted for industrial use a large area of severely substandard ho 66
Essay evaluation report
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: 21 15
No. of Words: 492 350
No. of Characters: 2660 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.71 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.407 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.824 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 216 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 168 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 130 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 84 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.429 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.702 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.81 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.344 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 52, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in an argument predicts that in order to increase profit even more dramatically, ...
^^
Line 3, column 433, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Is
...ad of reducing water flow to one-third. is increased due to certain external facto...
^^
Line 3, column 585, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'sound'
Suggestion: sound
... a possibility that conclusion does not sounding trustworthy. Also, the author uses corr...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 15, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ccording too building. In conclusion, an argument consists of many unanswered ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, well, while, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 55.5748502994 133% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2748.0 2260.96107784 122% => OK
No of words: 493.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57403651116 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9520844102 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.468559837728 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 853.2 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.914811664 57.8364921388 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.909090909 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4090909091 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.210477620591 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0602247215139 0.0743258471296 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0665763079631 0.0701772020484 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123500364141 0.128457276422 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0788400327764 0.0628817314937 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 98.500998004 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => 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
---------------------
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.