In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions.
The argument states that the beginner is more likely to contribute in a field than an expert. But an expert has years of experience and has gained in-depth knowledge of the governing dynamics of the field. In a way, an expert has an upper hand over the beginner and thus, it is not likely that a beginner will contribute more than an expert.
Experts have thorough knowledge and experience and have an upper hand in governing the dynamics of the field. For instance, an established and expert nuclear physicist might have beforehand knowledge of precautions and what could go wrong in performing any experiment and could contribute well in ensuring the safety of the personnel accompanying him, whereas a beginner might not be able to see through the same.
Experts are more likely to contribute the field as they have experience and knowledge and they can guide the beginner in the right direction in order to be productive and innovative. For instance, when Einstein was struggling to get his ideas noticed in the scientific world, it was Plank, who at that time was expert physicist, guided him and gave him the requisite opportunities in the scientific community. He may not have helped him intellectually but he definitely had guided him in the right direction.
However, beginners are mostly younger than expert fraternity and are energetic. They are more likely to address the problems with enthusiasm and avid than an expert. Though they lack experience and thorough knowledge but they are more willingly to push themselves and to make a mark in the field. The probability of contributing might be in their favour or might be not but the ardor and dedication usually pays off and they themselves become the expert.
In a nutshell, an expert has a better chances of contributing in a field than a tyro or dilettante due to accrual of in-depth knowledge and experience that might come handy while doing any task, experiment, work, etc. The beginner usually becomes expert when they start contributing in the field.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, so, thus, well, whereas, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 58.6224719101 68% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1692.0 2235.4752809 76% => OK
No of words: 340.0 442.535393258 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97647058824 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83748237499 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 215.323595506 70% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.444117647059 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 531.9 704.065955056 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.5340046418 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.857142857 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2857142857 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.78571428571 5.21951772744 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.319113908706 0.243740707755 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.147745280776 0.0831039109588 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103502761141 0.0758088955206 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200307769321 0.150359130593 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0858161069401 0.0667264976115 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 100.480337079 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.