The reading passage and lecture about buzzing, which is a type of advertising of priducts. Writer of the passage points that buzzing shuold be banned. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article. He says, critics about buzzing are missleading.
First, Author states, consumers do not know that persons who praising the products is being paid, consumers expect the truth from people who do not have any motive. This point challenged by lecturer. He points, missleading or not truth, because the company hired people how used products and satified with it, so they will say the truth about of it" guaitity.
Second, the author claims, buzzers pretend just private person, therfore peoples will listen to them less critically comparing with advertisement on TV, especialy, when they are not being lobbied. The professor rebuts this argument. He mention that, that is opposit, because people can take a lot of information from the buzzer like,price, guality, and how long buzzer used this product, and give example, his cell phone.
Finally, tha author elaborates that, buzzing has a harmful effect on social relationship, moreover, moreover, we become aware that people we meet socialy with them hidden the truth. The professor in the other hand, suggests, buzzing increase the sociaty and never lead to dishonesty. He mentions, when buzzer advertised good products that already bought it before, and know well about it, this increase the rate selling forthis product, furthermore, consumers who always buy by using help of buzzer, they will have a good impression about this type of advertisements.
The reading passage and lecture about buzzing, which is a type of advertising of priducts. Writer of the passage points that buzzing shuold be banned. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article. He says, critics about buzzing are missleading.
First, Author states, consumers do not know that persons who praising the products is being paid, consumers expect the truth from people who do not have any motive. This point challenged by lecturer. He points, missleading or not truth, because the company hired people how used products and satified with it, so they will say the truth about of it" guaitity.
Second, the author claims, buzzers pretend just private person, therfore peoples will listen to them less critically comparing with advertisement on TV, especialy, when they are not being lobbied. The professor rebuts this argument. He mention that, that is opposit, because people can take a lot of information from the buzzer like,price, guality, and how long buzzer used this product, and give example, his cell phone.
Finally, tha author elaborates that, buzzing has a harmful effect on social relationship, moreover, moreover, we become aware that people we meet socialy with them hidden the truth. The professor in the other hand, suggests, buzzing increase the sociaty and never lead to dishonesty. He mentions, when buzzer advertised good products that already bought it before, and know well about it, this increase the rate selling forthis product, furthermore, consumers who always buy by using help of buzzer, they will have a good impression about this type of advertisements.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-10-21 | talelaldabous | 83 | view |
- The reading passage and the lecture are both talking about computerize smart cars The writer claims several benefits by using this type of cars However the professor casts doubt on claim made in article She believes using computerize cars i snot clear ben 78
- The reading and lecture about the working four days a week instead of five days a week The author beileives that four days work a week is good option The lecturer casts doubts on the claim made in the article He thinks that full time work is better First 76
- The passage and lecture are both discussing advanteges of smart cars The passage claim three advanteges of smart cars The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in the article She states smart cars are not clearly have advanteges First the writer states these 68
- Today with a huge advancement in technology in all aspect of life people demand on internet is increase The question is whether government should fund to improve internet access or public transportation This can be weighed in many aspects Admittedly some 70
- Our life faces advance improvement in technology in order to be familiar with this innovation youngster is the important part of people they are the step stone in this society The question is whether organization and planning is essential thing in our lif 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The reading passage and lecture about bu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...critics about buzzing are missleading. First, Author states, consumers do not k...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 142, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ng paid, consumers expect the truth from people who do not have any motive. This ...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the truth about of it' guaitity. Second, the author claims, buzzers prete...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 246, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'He' must be used with a third-person verb: 'mentions'.
Suggestion: mentions
... The professor rebuts this argument. He mention that, that is opposit, because people c...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 342, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , price
... lot of information from the buzzer like,price, guality, and how long buzzer used this...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uct, and give example, his cell phone. Finally, tha author elaborates that, buz...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, if, moreover, second, so, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1354.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 257.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26848249027 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61361030638 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.622568093385 0.540411800872 115% => OK
syllable_count: 401.4 419.366225166 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 3.25607064018 307% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.6506295511 49.2860985944 153% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.153846154 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7692307692 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.92307692308 7.06452816374 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.307215888625 0.272083759551 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135479778871 0.0996497079465 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.135321725699 0.0662205650399 204% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.239511799357 0.162205337803 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.272018661152 0.0443174109184 614% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.