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.
According to the article, the speaker proposes an increased budget for riverside recreational activities, citing the fact that the residents of Mason City enjoy water sports the most. The speaker concludes that the cleaning of the Mason River will boost the use of the river for water sports. However, there isn't any clear evidence to prove the same.
Although the residents of Mason City certainly enjoy water sports the most amongst all recreational activities, there isn't any evidence stating that they would want to use Mason River in particular for such activities. According to the article, the only complaint about the river was its pungent smell, which called for the urgent action of cleaning up the river. Thus, we can, in no way, assume that the people of Mason City would want to use the river explicitly for swimming, boating, and fishing.
There is even more doubt on the fact that the Mason City residents engage in water sports at any time of the year. If they enjoy such recreational activities only during the holidays, there is a probability that they might prefer to go out of the city for a change in scenery. Although there will definitely be some people going to Mason River to enjoy such activities, it is difficult to firmly state whether that number will be the majority or not. If more people prefer to go away for their holidays, the entire logic of the speaker is immensely flawed. As there isn't enough information shedding light on this matter, the popularity of Mason River is still quite in the dark.
Furthermore, even if such matters were concluded appropriately, there isn't any mentioning of the matter whether the river itself would be suitable for such activities. Considering pungent smells and the cleaning drive, there isn't any reliable information on whether the cleaning would be completed within the same year or not. If it isn't, the budget for riverside recreational activities would become null and void, rendering it redundant for the time.
Thus, in conclusion, there isn't enough evidence mentioned in the article to validate the speaker's position of a definite increase in the popularity of the Mason River, owing to its clean-up drive. With the lack of appropriate information, it is difficult to conclude that there should be more money devoted for 'riverside recreational activities' in the year's budget.
| 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 |
- 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 82
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 66
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 399 350
No. of Characters: 1920 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.469 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.812 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.613 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 125 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 91 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.938 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.607 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.382 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.599 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.102 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 309, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
... river for water sports. However, there isnt any clear evidence to prove the same. ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 119, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ngst all recreational activities, there isnt any evidence stating that they would wa...
^^^^
Line 5, column 567, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...e speaker is immensely flawed. As there isnt enough information shedding light on th...
^^^^
Line 7, column 71, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ers were concluded appropriately, there isnt any mentioning of the matter whether th...
^^^^
Line 7, column 226, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...nt smells and the cleaning drive, there isnt any reliable information on whether the...
^^^^
Line 7, column 334, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...eted within the same year or not. If it isnt, the budget for riverside recreational ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 28, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...the time. Thus, in conclusion, there isnt enough evidence mentioned in the articl...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, so, still, thus, in conclusion, in particular
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1974.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 392.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03571428571 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44960558625 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65056299175 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.44387755102 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 625.5 705.55239521 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
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: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.9837706616 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.375 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.4375 5.70786347227 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => 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: 0.295859254581 0.218282227539 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112936076042 0.0743258471296 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0896096900583 0.0701772020484 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192368435702 0.128457276422 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105129264778 0.0628817314937 167% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.