The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice to a client.
"Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experienced 90 days with below-average temperatures, and climate forecasters at Waymarsh University predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes have been built in this region during the past year. Because these developments will certainly result in an increased demand for heating oil, we recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil."
The author of this argument recommends that investing in Consolidated Industries, which sales oil as home heating oil is profitable. To justify this recommendation, the author cites the following facts. According to the predictions, this city will experience cold weather in 90 days of years in several coming years. In addition, people have been built many homes in the past years, so the demand for oil will be increased.
Fist, relies on the fact that plenty of houses were built in the past years, the author claims that demand for oil as a fuel will be increased. However, it is not necessarily the case. The author ignores this point that new homes can be isolated, which decline the fuel consumption. Moreover, it is possible that people decide to use new approaches for providing their fuels such as the use solar cells. Without considering these possible scenarios, the author can not justifiably conclude that sales of oil will be enhanced.
Second, the author relies on the fact that climate forecasters predict the cold weather will continue for more years. In fact, people may need more oil in some years, while the author provides no assurance that this condition will continue for ever. In short, since the argument relies on the limited information, I can not take the author’s final conclusion seriously.
In third place, a serious of problems with this argument rises from the scant statistical information. The author gives not any information about the economic conditions of Consolidated Industries. Indeed, it is possible the cost of production in this factory is high, because of the use old technology. In this way, investing in Consolidated Industries is not profitable. In addition, the author must provide statistical information that this factory can produce more oil according to increasing the demand.
In sum, this argument is flawed logically and therefore unconvincing it stands. To strengthen the recommendation, the author must provide more statistical information the number of population in this city. In order t evaluate better author’s conclusion, we would know more about feature of houses, and the rate of their fuel consumption. In addition, it would be better know about economic condition of factory.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...r's final conclusion seriously. In third place, a serious of problems with...
^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... according to increasing the demand. In sum, this argument is flawed logically ...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['however', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'third', 'while', 'in addition', 'in fact', 'in short', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.273381294964 0.25644967241 107% => OK
Verbs: 0.141486810552 0.15541462614 91% => OK
Adjectives: 0.083932853717 0.0836205057962 100% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0335731414868 0.0520304965353 65% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0215827338129 0.0272364105082 79% => OK
Prepositions: 0.141486810552 0.125424944231 113% => OK
Participles: 0.0407673860911 0.0416121511921 98% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.95909482413 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0119904076739 0.026700313972 45% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.117505995204 0.113004496875 104% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0359712230216 0.0255425247493 141% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00719424460432 0.0127820249294 56% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2264.0 2731.13054187 83% => OK
No of words: 362.0 446.07635468 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.25414364641 6.12365571057 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.57801047555 95% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.378453038674 0.378187486979 100% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.279005524862 0.287650121315 97% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.21270718232 0.208842608468 102% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.165745856354 0.135150697306 123% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95909482413 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 207.018472906 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.477900552486 0.469332199767 102% => OK
Word variations: 49.8999189218 52.1807786196 96% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 17.2380952381 23.2022227129 74% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.5350493412 57.7814097925 46% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.80952381 141.986410481 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2380952381 23.2022227129 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.666666666667 0.724660767414 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 45.1386477243 51.9672348444 87% => OK
Elegance: 2.31707317073 1.8405768891 126% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308924830963 0.441005458295 70% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.133294066637 0.135418324435 98% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.106914747974 0.0829849096947 129% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.567126354252 0.58762219726 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.101364599442 0.147661913831 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135489273088 0.193483328276 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0519627273439 0.0970749176394 54% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.467912153922 0.42659136922 110% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0458631841312 0.0774707102158 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.225622177855 0.312017818177 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0452942082705 0.0698173142475 65% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.87684729064 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.82512315271 145% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.82389162562 212% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.