In a letter to the editor of a local
newspaper in Masontown, It is stated that
to save money on garbage disposal fees
residents of city have to recycle more.
Author comes to this conclusion based on
several premises, which, if true, could
indicate that this argument holds water.
However, these premises contain three
unwarranted assumptions, if not
substantiated, significantly weaken the
persuasiveness of the statement.
First of all, The author assumes, without
evidence, that two cities Hayesworth and
Masontown are comparable. It is possible
that situations in the city Hayesworth
might be different to the situations in
city Masontown. Perhaps the
charecteristics of both are different,
Garbage disposal system in Hayesworth may
be efficient while in Masontown ins might
be not efficient as Hayesworth garbage
disposal system. Perhaps Hayesworth city
mayor monitors garbage disposal system
keenly, where as Mansontown major is one
who is not stringent in passing laws and
making sure that people are following
those rules. If this scenario has merit,
then considerably the argument proposed
by author does not hold water.
Secondly, Author presumes, without
justification, that there is a
significant decrease in disposal costs in
Hayesworth city. Given that Hayesworth
citizens have saved money, this may be a
reasonable assumption. Perhaps costs
might have decreased by one percent when
comparable to scenario before the law was
passed. It is possible that, disposal
cost might have increased due to
recycling the household waste, which
generally costs more amount.
Perhaps the information that there is
dcrease in disposal costs might be false.
It is possible that, Authorities of
Hayesworth could have presented wrong
information. If above mentioned scenario
is considered the original argument can
be seriously undermined.
Finally, Author assumes that adversting
campaign on encouraging residents in
Masontown to recycle will be succesful.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 296 350
No. of Characters: 1617 1500
No. of Different Words: 154 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.148 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.463 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.945 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 124 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 84 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.809 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.562 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.335 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.335 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.068 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 24, column 9, Rule ID: WHERE_AS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whereas'?
Suggestion: whereas
...nitors garbage disposal system keenly, where as Mansontown major is one who is not str...
^^^^^^^^
Line 46, column 14, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ould have presented wrong information. If above mentioned scenario is considered...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, while, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1754.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 296.0 441.139720559 67% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.92567567568 5.12650576532 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03232373221 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.547297297297 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 516.6 705.55239521 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.7778103645 57.8364921388 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.625 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0625 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 51.0 5.15768463074 989% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.194802370002 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0695493899413 0.0743258471296 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.095583375064 0.0701772020484 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0424460000359 0.128457276422 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0596499226432 0.0628817314937 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 14.3799401198 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.11 12.5979740519 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.06 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 98.500998004 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => 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.