“The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area. Although only a small percentage of the land will be sold to Smith, the proposed development will have disastrous consequences for our area. The company plans to build a small hotel on the land. Although they have promised to ensure the preservation of the sanctuary, there is no way that their plans will do anything but harm the sanctuary. There are no circumstances under which this sale will benefit our community, which relies on tourists who visit.”
The author of the petition provides unreliable arguments and employs an illogical line of thought to draw up the present conclusion which renders it unsound. The information gathered is insufficient to reach a justifiable and strong conclusion. Hence, a thorough investigation of the current situation is required.
Firstly, the author states that the proposed development would have disastrous consequences for the area which is essential for the survival of bird species. However, this assumption of the author is not backed by concrete evidences. No detail regarding the scale of this consequence is provided. Will this proposed development lead to loss of the sanctuary? Will this affect the survival of the 300 bird species? It is possible that the proposed development would not have a huge impact on the wellness of the sanctuary. The negative impact on the sanctuary could be minute enough and could be managed well by the Smith Corporation. Hence, reaching the present conclusion without providing such critical details is not justifiable.
Secondly, the author doubts the reliability of the corporation's promise to ensure preservation. However, the author fails to substantiate this doubt with evidence. There is no mention of the steps that the corporation plans to employ for the safety of the sanctuary. Additionally, there is also reason mentioned for distrusting the corporation. Hence, it is possible that the corporation would successfully complete their proposed development without affecting the sanctuary. Also, there exists the possibility that the corporation could be have a good reputation and has no history of disastrous projects.
Thirdly, the author relies on premise that the development would bring in no benefit through sales. However, this statement needs to be backed with true facts to present a strong case. The author ignores the details regarding the current situation of the sanctuary and sales through tourists. Are the current sales sufficient to cater to the economic needs of the sanctuary? Can this development attract more number of tourists and thereby increase sales? These ignored information is important and needs to be considered before arriving at the present conclusion.
To sum, the author presents a number of arguments which are unsubstantial and reaches a conclusion without considering the alternative scenarios and important information. The current arguments evoke a number of questions that need to be answered. Hence, additional details need to be collected, reviewed and analyzed to reach a strong conclusion.
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'firstly', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'regarding', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'third', 'thirdly', 'well']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.232183908046 0.25644967241 91% => OK
Verbs: 0.181609195402 0.15541462614 117% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0919540229885 0.0836205057962 110% => OK
Adverbs: 0.032183908046 0.0520304965353 62% => OK
Pronouns: 0.00919540229885 0.0272364105082 34% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0988505747126 0.125424944231 79% => OK
Participles: 0.0528735632184 0.0416121511921 127% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.07490840332 2.79052419416 110% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0344827586207 0.026700313972 129% => OK
Particles: 0.00459770114943 0.001811407834 254% => OK
Determiners: 0.158620689655 0.113004496875 140% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0229885057471 0.0255425247493 90% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00919540229885 0.0127820249294 72% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2581.0 2731.13054187 95% => OK
No of words: 395.0 446.07635468 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.53417721519 6.12365571057 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.450632911392 0.378187486979 119% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.356962025316 0.287650121315 124% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.281012658228 0.208842608468 135% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.19746835443 0.135150697306 146% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07490840332 2.79052419416 110% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 207.018472906 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.463291139241 0.469332199767 99% => OK
Word variations: 49.3901429882 52.1807786196 95% => OK
How many sentences: 26.0 20.039408867 130% => OK
Sentence length: 15.1923076923 23.2022227129 65% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.1624055748 57.7814097925 52% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.2692307692 141.986410481 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.1923076923 23.2022227129 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5 0.724660767414 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.58251231527 0% => OK
Readability: 50.888510224 51.9672348444 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.72164948454 1.8405768891 94% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.651360747355 0.441005458295 148% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.126557127033 0.135418324435 93% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0883571650605 0.0829849096947 106% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.564433920772 0.58762219726 96% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.130965206964 0.147661913831 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.285449285772 0.193483328276 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.124568743648 0.0970749176394 128% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.539024046927 0.42659136922 126% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.096341684446 0.0774707102158 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.469301671943 0.312017818177 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.122297755429 0.0698173142475 175% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.33743842365 120% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.87684729064 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 10.0 5.36822660099 186% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.