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 Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels.
In the letter to editor, author wants to talk about the problem faced by Central Plaza due to increased skateboarding. While explaining it he states that shoppers have reduced due to skateboarding practice and also states that this is also the view of most of the shop owners. He put forth the suggestion to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza to enhance business again. Though these evidences by author seem to be convincing but there are many rife of holes and missing gaps that are questionable in given argument.
Firstly, Authors directly relates the decrease in number of shoppers problem to increase in number of skateboarding. This can be considered as really vague conclusion for instance. The only reason to decrease in number of shoppers cannot be skateboarding, there may be deteriorating quality of food items, quarrel between shopper and shopkeepers, bad service provide by shopkeepers and many more. So, directly correlating shopper reduction to skateboarding activity increase is not acceptable.
Moreover, author adds that the store owners believe the above fact as well. But here he have not clearly stated who are shop owners, statistics regarding complaints, do shop owners themselves run the shop? There may be a situation that shop owner need a fake publicity or there is also possibility of shop owner having personal issues with skateboarders. Thus, due to innumerous questions arising we cannot directly believe on statement made by shop owners without any strong evidences.
Furthermore, author claims that if skateboarding prohibited in Central Plaza, business may return to high levels again. We are not at a stand to predict such statement as argued by above arguments. There may be a case that some other shoppers are responsible deteriorating the business of Central Plaza. In that case, even after prohibiting the Skateboarding it will go on deteriorating. Even if we consider Skateboarding was reason to negative business in Central Plaza, may be in future there exist some other practice which may lead to negative business as well. Thus, such predictions are not acceptable.
Therefore, author talking about the problem faced by Central Plaza due to increased skateboarding is proven to be filled with many assumptions and missing gaps are found, thus, suggestion to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza to enhance business again is unacceptable and need more strong evidence.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-13 | Anish Sapkota | 77 | view |
| 2023-04-06 | sijan | 53 | view |
| 2023-01-26 | ljh5034 | 78 | view |
| 2022-09-25 | ctoluwasedaniel | 68 | view |
| 2022-06-23 | sag15 | 72 | view |
- Formal education tends to restrain our minds and spirits rather than set them free 16
- The well being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority 58
- The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a manufacturing company During the past year workers at our newly opened factory reported 30 percent more on the job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries Panoply produces products ve 66
- 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 complain 74
- Workers in the small town of Leeville take fewer sick days than workers in the large city of Masonton 50 miles away Moreover relative to population size the diagnosis of stress related illness is proportionally much lower in Leeville than in Masonton Acco 74
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 383 350
No. of Characters: 1995 1500
No. of Different Words: 186 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.424 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.209 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.965 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.158 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.161 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.789 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.316 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.111 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 450, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'rives'?
Suggestion: rives
...eem to be convincing but there are many rife of holes and missing gaps that are ques...
^^^^
Line 3, column 88, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'has'.
Suggestion: has
...eve the above fact as well. But here he have not clearly stated who are shop owners,...
^^^^
Line 3, column 112, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...ll. But here he have not clearly stated who are shop owners, statistics regarding compl...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, moreover, really, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for instance, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2040.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 383.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32637075718 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04674567882 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.493472584856 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 648.9 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.0207719037 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.368421053 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1578947368 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.31578947368 5.70786347227 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.325388205022 0.218282227539 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0990717601215 0.0743258471296 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0777381576506 0.0701772020484 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18102335122 0.128457276422 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.053521459209 0.0628817314937 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.