In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fish ing) among their favorite 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.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The problem with the arguement is the assumption that if the Mason River were cleaned up, that people would use it for water sports and recreation. This is not necessarily true, as people may rank water sports among their favorite recreational activities, but that does not mean that those same people have the financial ability, time or equipment to pursue those interests.
However, even if the writer of the arguement is correct in assuming that the Mason River will be used more by the city’s residents, the arguement does not say why the recreational facilities need more money. If recreational facilities already exist along the Mason River, why should the city allot more money to fund them? If the recreational facilities already in existence will be used more in the coming years, then they will be making more money for themselves, eliminating the need for the city government to devote more money to them.
According to the arguement, the reason people are not using the Mason River for water sports is because of the smell and the quality of water, not because the recreational facilities are unacceptable.
If the city government alloted more money to the recreational facilities, then the budget is being cut from some other important city project. Also, if the assumptions proved unwarranted, and more people did not use the river for recreation, then much money has been wasted, not only the money for the recreational facilities, but also the money that was used to clean up the river to attract more people in the first place.
- If you could meet a famous entertainer or athlete, who would that be, and why? Use specific reasons and examples to support your choice. 3
- 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 33
- The following appeared in a business magazine."As a result of numerous complaints of dizziness and nausea on the part of consumers of Promofoods tuna, the company requested that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. Promofoods concl 33
- In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County last year lowered its speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour on all county highways. But this effort has failed: the number of accidents has not decreased, and, based on reports by the highway patro 50
- Some people believe that citizens can most benefit their communities by contributing timeand resources to volunteer efforts (e.g., town cleanups, youth sports leagues, food andclothing drives). Others believe that a community is better served when most of 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, then, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 33.0505617978 45% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 58.6224719101 38% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1295.0 2235.4752809 58% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 260.0 442.535393258 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.98076923077 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.55969084622 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71488064619 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 126.0 215.323595506 59% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.484615384615 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 413.1 704.065955056 59% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 20.2370786517 40% => 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: 32.0 23.0359550562 139% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.9581629869 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 161.875 118.986275619 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.5 23.4991977007 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 5.21951772744 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 10.2758426966 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.273904010833 0.243740707755 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.145442602551 0.0831039109588 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.031124444236 0.0758088955206 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.177313369601 0.150359130593 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0220471193718 0.0667264976115 33% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 14.1392134831 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.0 48.8420337079 80% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.1743820225 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.2 12.1639044944 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 100.480337079 45% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 11.8971910112 164% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 11.2143820225 132% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.