In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favourite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.
The author of this proposal to increase the budget for Mason City riverside recreational facilities offers an interesting argument but it does not make a cogent case for increased resources based on river use. In order to move forward on the proposal, more information and thought is required. It is understandable that the citizens would want a cleaner river but the argument presented is teeming with hole and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to an increase in the funding for riverside recreational activities.
The argument cites a survey that was conducted, which states that the residents of Mason City rank water sports, which includes, swimming, boating and fishing, among their favourite recreational activities. However, the scope and the validity of the survey is extremely unclear. For example, the survey could have asked the residents if they wanted water sports on the riverside or whether building a dam would be better. In such a case it is quite evident that the citizens would have preferred waterside recreational facilities instead of a dam. Also, the survey could have been five pages long but could include only a couple of questions about water sports. It is also unclear as to whether the survey was conducted on a wide range of people or only ones residing near the river. Hence there is proof of the fact if the survey is completely representative of the residents of Mason City or not.
A second flaw present in the given argument is that the citizens do not indulge in any kind of water sports though they mention in the survey that their preferred recreational activities include swimming, boating and fishing. The reason cited for the non use of the river by the residents is that the river quality is not good and the fact that it smells. But there is no apparent relationship between the usage of the river and its nature. Thus there is no way to ascertain whether the complaints made were by a majority of the citizens of Mason City or whether they were made by a few people who live near the Mason river. In order to strengthen his or her argument the author should have conducted a better organised survey asking numerous people as to why they do make use of the river's water.
Another defect in the argument given refers to the fact that if a clean-up of the river is organised, there is no guarantee that the residents will make use of the river. For instance, if the smell of the river is due to some factory on the riverside then a solution can be thought of to remove the stench of the river but if the smell is due to some natural factors like a kind of mineral that produces a noxious smell, then even if the park department would embark on a thorough cleaning spree, it would do no good as such. Therefore there is no connection between the usage of the river and the quality of the river.
A beautiful, safe and well maintained river will definitely add to the over all beauty of the entire city and it is the responsibility
of the park department as well as of the city government to ensure that the river is clean and well maintained. It will lead to an increase in tourism and also an increase in the revenue of the whole city. But the argument that has been put forth by the author to raise the funding for riverside recreational facilities is not a cogent and a practical one and will not lead to more money being devoted for the same cause.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-10 | snowsss | 50 | view |
| 2019-08-08 | ruchavarade | 55 | view |
| 2019-08-04 | Asmita Pathak | 82 | view |
| 2019-06-10 | pallavipolas | 29 | view |
| 2018-09-12 | Aarohi Agarwal | 49 | view |
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor in the journal Health Matters.Statistics gathered over the past three decades show that the death rate is higher among those who do not have jobs than those with regular employment. Unemployment, just like 10
- In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favourite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes litt 83
- Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 682, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
... about water sports. It is also unclear as to whether the survey was conducted on a wide rang...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 785, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...e or only ones residing near the river. Hence there is proof of the fact if the surve...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 442, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... the usage of the river and its nature. Thus there is no way to ascertain whether th...
^^^^
Line 7, column 527, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ing spree, it would do no good as such. Therefore there is no connection between the usag...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 135, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...entire city and it is the responsibility of the park department as well as of the...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'thus', 'well', 'as to', 'for example', 'for instance', 'kind of', 'as well as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.250769230769 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.14 0.15541462614 90% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0723076923077 0.0836205057962 86% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0476923076923 0.0520304965353 92% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0261538461538 0.0272364105082 96% => OK
Prepositions: 0.14 0.125424944231 112% => OK
Participles: 0.0384615384615 0.0416121511921 92% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.62353829175 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0261538461538 0.026700313972 98% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.152307692308 0.113004496875 135% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0215384615385 0.0255425247493 84% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0107692307692 0.0127820249294 84% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3429.0 2731.13054187 126% => OK
No of words: 608.0 446.07635468 136% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63980263158 6.12365571057 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9656475924 4.57801047555 108% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.300986842105 0.378187486979 80% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.223684210526 0.287650121315 78% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.159539473684 0.208842608468 76% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.106907894737 0.135150697306 79% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62353829175 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 207.018472906 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.401315789474 0.469332199767 86% => OK
Word variations: 48.1395007026 52.1807786196 92% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 28.9523809524 23.2022227129 125% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.323651862 57.7814097925 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 163.285714286 141.986410481 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.9523809524 23.2022227129 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.761904761905 0.724660767414 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 3.58251231527 140% => OK
Readability: 51.320802005 51.9672348444 99% => OK
Elegance: 2.0071942446 1.8405768891 109% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.44517814572 0.441005458295 101% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.163469984179 0.135418324435 121% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0521252924866 0.0829849096947 63% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.664529614384 0.58762219726 113% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.13069180044 0.147661913831 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.221845469657 0.193483328276 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0794470547242 0.0970749176394 82% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.554026566696 0.42659136922 130% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.112549459818 0.0774707102158 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.330244310279 0.312017818177 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0477094918861 0.0698173142475 68% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.87684729064 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 67.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on language. 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 to cover all aspects.