In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham.
Rocingham’s old town is too small to live and waste energy by heating old hall in winter and cooling it in summer. Hence, many citizen of the town want to build the energy efficient building which save a considerable amount of money. The new building will be more energy efficient and cost less per square foot for heat and cool than the old building. Therefore, the new building will be spacious enough so that they can rent and gain the income. According to author he wants to build the new building by replacing old one by which there will be income for the town but the arguments or assumption he state has some flaws in it.
Firstly, the old town hall is too small and very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer so they want to construct the new building which will save energy and money. This statement has flaws in it which author failed to explain like to construct new building they require huge amount of money whereas, the old hall is very costly they are having difficulty to live but how to they get money to construct new building. Also he says that new building will be more energy efficient but he has not explained how it be better than old building it may be the same because the new building which is spacious enough so many people can live therefore usage of energy may increase it will be same as old housing.
Secondly, the old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. Therefore, if they construct new building where do the people employed by the town live. He has failed to explain about the accommodation of employee who works in the old town. For example to rebuild the old town it may take years, where do they people of the old town live what about their daily wages how will they survive until they construct the new building he has failed explain this all hence, the argument has many flaws in it.
The author suggest that constructing new building they can gain the incoming, but has not explained the drawback which may arise if they construct the new building. The author has not done any survey whether the people who are living in old town what new building or whether they are satisfied with old building. he cannot come to conclude to build new building with just few citizen request.
In conclusion, the argument would have been strong if the author had explained about the living condition of people in old town, revenue where he will get to construct the new building, and where he will replace the current employee and many more.
- The function of science is to reassure; the purpose of art is to upset. Therein lies the value of each. 50
- The way students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields is more a matter of personality than of training. Different interpretations come about when people with different personalities look at exactly the same objects, 50
- Laws should not be rigid or fixed. Instead, they should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places. 33
- The study of an academic discipline alters the way we perceive the world. After studying the discipline, we see the same world as before, but with different eyes. 50
- Claitown University needs both affordable housing for its students and a way to fund the building of such housing. The best solution to this problem is to commission a famous architect known for experimental and futuristic buildings. It is common knowledg 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 128, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun citizen seems to be countable; consider using: 'many citizens'.
Suggestion: many citizens
...winter and cooling it in summer. Hence, many citizen of the town want to build the energy ef...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 439, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...ey get money to construct new building. Also he says that new building will be more ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 532, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...ficient but he has not explained how it be better than old building it may be the ...
^^
Line 7, column 12, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'suggests'.
Suggestion: suggests
...ent has many flaws in it. The author suggest that constructing new building they can...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 314, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: He
...r they are satisfied with old building. he cannot come to conclude to build new bu...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2107.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 464.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.54094827586 5.12650576532 89% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64119157421 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.32953203308 2.78398813304 84% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 204.123752495 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.35775862069 0.468620217663 76% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 632.7 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59920159681 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 66.3965066382 57.8364921388 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.6875 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0 23.324526521 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.9375 5.70786347227 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.332620552073 0.218282227539 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.161593823817 0.0743258471296 217% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0974688470318 0.0701772020484 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.219575356113 0.128457276422 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104940096633 0.0628817314937 167% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.96 48.3550499002 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 12.197005988 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.64 12.5979740519 77% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.91 8.32208582834 83% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 98.500998004 55% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.