The argument presented by the anthropologist, Dr.Karp, undermines the very basis of comparing two methods in general. In invalidating Dr.Karp's method of coming to a conclusion, he deduces improper conclusion from the two methods used at different point of time to generalize the response of a community. His conclusion is marred with logical fallacies and requires proper evidence for it to become a discerning argument.
First of all, Dr.Karp's observation was done 20 years ago and the author of the argument makes a false assumption in presuming that the population under observation would result in worthwhile understanding of the community. Furthermore, he comes to a conclusion by comparing two different sets of citizens of the Tertia village. He will need to provide evidence that the diversity among the community remained constant and hence would result in better conclusions.
Secondly, the experiments done by the author were taken for a group of islands and not only Tertia village which leads to skepticism in the authors conclusion that his method is superior than that of his counterpart. It can be possible that the group of people interviewed by the authors team were primarily from other islands and thus, would not consequently provide a better picture of the Tertia village community. He needs to provide evidence that his experiments presents a better image of the community in large. For an experiment to result in discerning outcome, the scope of the experiment should subsume a larger proportion of the community.
Thirdly, given the outcome of the authors interviews, it is facile to assume that this one method is better than the other in generality. No one result is sufficient enough to prove a method better than the other. The authors method might not yield better results in a different place where people are reluctant to share their views or where people are not good with their communication of thoughts through interviews. He also fails in explaining or detailing the methods used for bservation by Dr.karp which would result in a better comparison of the two.
Finally, the authors argument lacks proper judgement of the given facts and observations and hence, derives a fallacious conclusion in determining his method better than the former. He will need to provide more evidence like the similarity in people included of both the experiments, what method was used in observation by Dr.Karp and also will need to provide evidence for the group of people included in his observation of a mixed group of islands.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 419 350
No. of Characters: 2098 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.524 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.007 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.857 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 117 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.188 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.084 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.37 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.605 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.177 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 50, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...ent presented by the anthropologist, Dr.Karp, undermines the very basis of comparing...
^^^^
Line 1, column 121, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... of comparing two methods in general. In invalidating Dr.Karps method of coming t...
^^^
Line 2, column 17, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karps
...ethods in general. In invalidating Dr.Karps method of coming to a conclusion, he de...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 126, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n from the two methods used at different point of time to generalize the response...
^^^
Line 3, column 134, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...l fallacies and requires proper evidence for it to become a discerning argument. ...
^^^
Line 6, column 18, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karps
...iscerning argument. First of all, Dr.Karps observation was done 20 years ago and t...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 126, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nt makes a false assumption in presuming that the population under observation wo...
^^^
Line 8, column 130, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d to provide evidence that the diversity among the community remained constant an...
^^^
Line 12, column 19, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...llage which leads to skepticism in the authors conclusion that his method is superior ...
^^^^^^^
Line 12, column 66, Rule ID: SUPERIOR_THAN[1]
Message: The adjective superior is normally used with 'to'.
Suggestion: to
... conclusion that his method is superior than that of his counterpart. It can be poss...
^^^^
Line 12, column 123, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...counterpart. It can be possible that the group of people interviewed by the autho...
^^^
Line 15, column 127, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f the experiment should subsume a larger proportion of the community. Thirdly,...
^^^
Line 19, column 80, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ove a method better than the other. The authors method might not yield better results i...
^^^^^^^
Line 19, column 130, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...thod might not yield better results in a different place where people are relucta...
^^^
Line 20, column 138, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... their communication of thoughts through interviews. He also fails in explaining ...
^^^
Line 21, column 127, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y Dr.karp which would result in a better comparison of the two. Finally, the a...
^^^
Line 24, column 14, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... comparison of the two. Finally, the authors argument lacks proper judgement of the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 26, column 68, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...at method was used in observation by Dr.Karp and also will need to provide evidence ...
^^^^
Line 26, column 135, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...provide evidence for the group of people included in his observation of a mixed g...
^^^
Line 28, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ervation of a mixed group of islands.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, hence, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, while, in general, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2185.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 415.0 441.139720559 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26506024096 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94404585725 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.440963855422 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 680.4 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.8648039815 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.5625 119.503703932 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.9375 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.4375 5.70786347227 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 23.0 5.15768463074 446% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 20.0 5.25449101796 381% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.153623606363 0.218282227539 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0537276458199 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437572454009 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.045305923385 0.128457276422 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0417879076313 0.0628817314937 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.3799401198 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.