The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex to its manager.
"One month ago, 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. I predict that modifying showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex will increase our profits even more dramatically."
The author of the above letter is the owner of Sunnyside tower apartment. He explains why they change all the shower head in their first three buildings. His main purpose is to cut payment for water monthly. Through restricting usage water, Sunnyside corporation expects considerable savings. From the owner perspective, this measure is successful because only a few complaints about this policy existed and cutting payment would ultimately increase Sunnyside towers profits. However, the manager’s argument in the letter is unsubstantiated with false assumptions.
First and foremost, the author has an assumption without empirical data. For example, as above the manager mentioned, actual data of water usage before and after the adjustment is not available. However, the manager suggested prospect that this adjustment would make a profit for the corporation without any empirical data. Therefore, the writer should present persuasive figures for argument.
Secondly, the author provides readers with an unpersuasive argument about increasing profit. He might think that restricting water flow would lead to decrease the usage of water efficiently. however, there is no evidence restricting water flow guarantees cutting water usage. On the contrary, some people would use more water than usual because lower water pressure precludes efficient usage of water. Hence, the manager should present persuasive evidence that restricting water flow is useful for generating a profit.
Additionally, the mention that there are a few complaints among residents about restricting water flow is not guaranteed. It is very strange that only a few inhabitants complain about reduced water usage. As we all know, water is an essential resource for a human being. If the usage of water were restricted, anyone easily felt inconvenience for this change. Furthermore, there is no detailed statistics of residents. Therefore, the above-suggested evidence that a few complaints about their measurement are very doubtful. Consequently, the author must give readers with reliable statistics about the response of residents.
In conclusion, the owner of the sunnyside tower apartment Complex suggests an unpersuasive argument with unsubstantiated assumptions. therefore, new reliable evidence is required to prove his argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 22 15
No. of Words: 342 350
No. of Characters: 1919 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.3 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.611 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.917 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 145 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.545 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.639 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.318 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.513 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.108 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ubstantiated with false assumptions. First and foremost, the author has an as...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nt persuasive figures for argument. Secondly, the author provides readers wi...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 192, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...ecrease the usage of water efficiently. however, there is no evidence restricting water...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...w is useful for generating a profit. Additionally, the mention that there are...
^^^^^
Line 15, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ics about the response of residents. In conclusion, the owner of the sunnysid...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 135, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
...ument with unsubstantiated assumptions. therefore, new reliable evidence is required to p...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 203, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ence is required to prove his argument.
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 55.5748502994 65% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2000.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 342.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.84795321637 5.12650576532 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06144121024 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.514619883041 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 630.9 705.55239521 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 22.8473053892 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.9672947765 57.8364921388 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 83.3333333333 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.25 23.324526521 61% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.41666666667 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.210450034911 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0630604274459 0.0743258471296 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678828458531 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12486139302 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0758144865468 0.0628817314937 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 40.34 48.3550499002 83% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.06 12.5979740519 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 12.3882235529 48% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 11.1389221557 68% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.