Last week, all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, modifying showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase our profits further."
The argument concludes that the profits will increase after modifying showerheads in all the twelve building in the Sunnyside Towers. The evidences cited to support this argument are previous week modifications in three buildings of the complex, few complaints of low pressure and the analogy between all the buildings of the complex. However, the premises are unable to justify or strengthen the weak conclusions. The main reasons why the argument is rendered inconclusive are incomplete data, fallacious assumptions and wrong analogy between the twelve buildings.
Firstly, the author said that the modifications are firstly done in the first three buildings of the complex and there will be reductions in the bills of the complex, but after the meticulous analysis it can be interpretted that the reduction in bills can be due to the other reasons too. Consider the case of winters and summers, as in summeers we use plenty of water for our daily chores but in winters the water use requirements become very scanty. So, if these modifications are done in winter then there will not a very much difference so, it can not be a very valid option to determine the bills. Additionally, the relationship between the maximum water flow and the modified shower heads is also not provided, as after the modifications the water flow can be increased too which will result in the increase in bills too. furthermore, there is also a possibility that with the decrease in water flow, now people spend more time in showers so, without the proper readings of the water flowing in each house of the complex , it can't be interpretted whether there will be decrease or increase in the water use.
Secondly, the author said that there are only few complaints about the less water pressure, so it can also be due to that many of the people living in that complex are on vacations and they are not in their homes and few people are in building at that time and they all have complained. Also, the exact figures are not given that how many complaints are lodged and how many people are living in that building, so without the exact data of how many people compained out of the total population in those complexes it ca't be said that the complaints corroborate the author's argument. So, the argument is inconclusive.
Last but not the least, author said mentioned that these modifications should be extended to the other twelve complexes too. This point is based on the wrong anlogy because the population is different in those complexes and living style, habits of each person is different from other person, so the complaints can be more too if this modification is extended in other comlexes. Furthermore, the author has said that there will be more profits, but the author haven't mentioned abouut the cost of modifications, what if the investment costs are more than the revenues generated then there will not be any profit. So, cost of modifications are also required to conclude whether there will be loss or profit.
So, in sum the aurgument is based in many fallacious assumptions and there is very much inadequacy of data. So, in order to prove his argumemt conclusive there is a need of more data and proper analogy otherwise the argument is completely inconclusive.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 828, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Furthermore
...ll result in the increase in bills too. furthermore, there is also a possibility that with ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1026, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ter flowing in each house of the complex , it cant be interpretted whether there w...
^^
Line 2, column 1032, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...owing in each house of the complex , it cant be interpretted whether there will be d...
^^^^
Line 2, column 1032, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'cants'?
Suggestion: cants
...owing in each house of the complex , it cant be interpretted whether there will be d...
^^^^
Line 3, column 515, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'cats'?
Suggestion: cats
... total population in those complexes it cat be said that the complaints corroborate...
^^^
Line 3, column 563, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...aid that the complaints corroborate the authors argument. So, the argument is inconclus...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 460, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
...re will be more profits, but the author havent mentioned abouut the cost of modificati...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 108, 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.
... there is very much inadequacy of data. So, in order to prove his argumemt conclus...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 40.0 19.6327345309 204% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2707.0 2260.96107784 120% => OK
No of words: 553.0 441.139720559 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89511754069 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77361886208 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.405063291139 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 864.0 705.55239521 122% => 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
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 78.3119159058 57.8364921388 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.388888889 119.503703932 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.7222222222 23.324526521 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.38888888889 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229142226159 0.218282227539 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0739636445929 0.0743258471296 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0730591583521 0.0701772020484 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111123233719 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0901024513859 0.0628817314937 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.3550499002 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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: 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.