city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river’s water and the river’s smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is therefore sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year’s budget to riverside recreational facilities.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The argument seems true generally, but meticulous analysis makes it specious. Various unwarrented assumptions have weaken the argument. In order to strengthen the argument following three questions must be answered.
Firstly, how many complains were reported against the foul smell from the river? It may be possible that the complain throughout the year was made by a single person. By not providing specific number of complains the argument is weakened.
Secondly, is the foul smell from river because of the river pollution? What if the foul smell was due to the naturally occurring Sulphur in the river so that cleaning of the river doesn't work and hence, no possibility of recreational activities in the river. The argument doesn't mention anything about the causes of foul smell in the river which badly undermine the argument.
Finally, do the residents, really interested in riverside recreational activities? The argument doesn't provide any evidence that the residents eagerly wanted to get involved in activities like swimming, boating or any other riverside recreational activities, which weaken the argument.
In conclusion, the unwarranted assumptions and unsubstantiated conclusion have weakened the argument and hence to strengthen the argument, rigorous study must be done in the complains, causes of foul smell in river, and river related recreational hobbies of the residents.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 116, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'weakened'.
Suggestion: weakened
...s. Various unwarrented assumptions have weaken the argument. In order to strengthen th...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 106, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...from the river? It may be possible that the complain throughout the year was made by a singl...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 181, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...the river so that cleaning of the river doesnt work and hence, no possibility of recre...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 274, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... activities in the river. The argument doesnt mention anything about the causes of fo...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 97, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...e recreational activities? The argument doesnt provide any evidence that the residents...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, hence, if, may, really, second, secondly, so, then, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.6327345309 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 5.0 28.8173652695 17% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 55.5748502994 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1192.0 2260.96107784 53% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 213.0 441.139720559 48% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.59624413146 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 4.56307096286 84% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99695305458 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 204.123752495 59% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.568075117371 0.468620217663 121% => OK
syllable_count: 362.7 705.55239521 51% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 64.9882468007 57.8364921388 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.3333333333 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.75 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.91666666667 5.70786347227 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186855282757 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0756240423381 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0657213277991 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102978735062 0.128457276422 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0650084666037 0.0628817314937 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.9 12.5979740519 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 98.500998004 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 12.3882235529 48% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.