Essay topics: "Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."
The author asserts that because of the increasing in the popularity of skateboarding, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been decreasing. Moreover, the author provides some information about skateboarding and he claims that it will be banned soon in Central Plaza. The author’s argument is vague and has many hidden points. The author should provide more information and facts to strengthen his argument.
First of all, the originate of the argument avers that the reasons of decreasing the shoppers number is because of skateboarding but he does not provide any information about the connections between them. In addition, we do not know what is the percent of decreasing of number of shoppers. There is a lack of information about skateboarding in general. The author does not state anything about the reasons behind the popularity of skateboarding. He claims that most of stores owners believe that the decreasing in number of their customers due to number of skateboard users but he does not state why that is happening and what is the connection between skateboard users and the other stores customers. Maybe all that just happens by chance.
Furthermore, although the author predicates that the city will ban skateboard because of the high increasing in the amount of litter of vandalism, he does not provide reasons and facts about the relationship between vandalism and skateboard. His or her predication cannot be dependable because of the insufficient information. First, we do not know how much the vandalism has increased from the past in plaza. Second, we are not sure that the city will forbidden skateboarding in Central Plaza and maybe the city will pass new laws to decrease the amount of vandalism instead of banning skateboarding at all.
In addition, somebody may say that if the city banned skateboarding in the Central plaza, they will be positive effects for both people and stores owners. First, what is the gauarantee that after banning skateboarding number of shoppers will restore and increase again?. People may find something else more beneficial and entertaimenting than shopping. Second, it is better for stores owners to look for some offers ,advertisements or anything increasing again their popularity instead of waiting to ban skateboarding.
In sum, the author’s argument may seem a bit releastic but if we go deep we will touch its weaknesses and we will see that it is not reliable at all.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 15, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...rengthen his argument. First of all, the originate of the argument avers that the reasons ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 416, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...or stores owners to look for some offers ,advertisements or anything increasing ag...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'furthermore', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'moreover', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'in addition', 'in general', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.244897959184 0.25644967241 95% => OK
Verbs: 0.160997732426 0.15541462614 104% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0453514739229 0.0836205057962 54% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0544217687075 0.0520304965353 105% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0498866213152 0.0272364105082 183% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.156462585034 0.125424944231 125% => OK
Participles: 0.047619047619 0.0416121511921 114% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.0487659162 2.79052419416 109% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0113378684807 0.026700313972 42% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0997732426304 0.113004496875 88% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0294784580499 0.0255425247493 115% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.015873015873 0.0127820249294 124% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2456.0 2731.13054187 90% => OK
No of words: 398.0 446.07635468 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.17085427136 6.12365571057 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46653527281 4.57801047555 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.376884422111 0.378187486979 100% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.28391959799 0.287650121315 99% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.198492462312 0.208842608468 95% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.158291457286 0.135150697306 117% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0487659162 2.79052419416 109% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 207.018472906 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.434673366834 0.469332199767 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 45.9422944958 52.1807786196 88% => OK
How many sentences: 19.0 20.039408867 95% => OK
Sentence length: 20.9473684211 23.2022227129 90% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.2443903248 57.7814097925 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.263157895 141.986410481 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9473684211 23.2022227129 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.684210526316 0.724660767414 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 49.33932822 51.9672348444 95% => OK
Elegance: 1.69230769231 1.8405768891 92% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.542720968931 0.441005458295 123% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.137226127547 0.135418324435 101% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.100989527272 0.0829849096947 122% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.583176013565 0.58762219726 99% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.2016135545 0.147661913831 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.230391462115 0.193483328276 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.144187469792 0.0970749176394 149% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.414474501653 0.42659136922 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.167963033663 0.0774707102158 217% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.350497892766 0.312017818177 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.141769106312 0.0698173142475 203% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.33743842365 120% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 9.0 6.46551724138 139% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 15.0 14.657635468 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.