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."
This letter recommends that in order to increase the profit predominantly, they should have to modified the showerheads in all the buildings of Sunnyside Tower apartment complex. to support this recommendation the owner only predict without any empirical outcomes. The owner also assumed that by applying restriction on showerhead of three buildings of the apartment, the water usage of the whole Sunnyside Tower apartment complex will reduced. According to me this is big fallacy for an argument.
First, the owner have to check out whether the water usage of that particular three buildings is actually decreased or not by modifying the showerheads of that buildings to restrict maximum water flow of one-third of what it used to be. If any considerable reduction in the usage of water was deducted then thy could apply this same restriction in all twelve buildings, and if not then there must be another source available where waste of water could possible except showerheads.
Another question that can be raised is: what is the contribution of water bills in the overall expenses of the
complex? If the water bills contribute to just a fraction of the overall expenses of the complex, then this
assumption fails to gain any favor. This is because if efforts are made to reduce costs in that part of the
budget which already contribute minimally in the expenses, it is highly unlikely that the profits will rise
dramatically. Thus, the owner may want to try and find other amenities that are likely to rise their profits if
used economically.
Also, it can be asked whether any polls were being conducted before taking the decision of modifying the
showerheads? These polls would have asked the residents about their water usage such as whether they use
showers too much or whether their use of water is for other purposes where showers are not used such as
cooking, gardening etc. If this step was taken, it could've given a better idea to the management about the
steps to be taken to save water rather than just doing trials like these showerheads modification.
Thus, the argument put forward by the owner of SunnysideTowers apartment complex about modifying
showerheads stands a lot of scrutiny and answering. If those questions discussed above are not answered, the
assumptions and predictions of the owner are absolutely implausible.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 180, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: To
...s of Sunnyside Tower apartment complex. to support this recommendation the owner o...
^^
Line 1, column 437, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'reduce'
Suggestion: reduce
... Sunnyside Tower apartment complex will reduced. According to me this is big fallacy fo...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 446, Rule ID: ACCORDING_TO_ME[1]
Message: This phrase can sound awkward in English. Consider using 'in my opinion' or 'I think'.
Suggestion: In my opinion; I think
...e Tower apartment complex will reduced. According to me this is big fallacy for an argument. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 43, Rule ID: TRY_AND[1]
Message: "Try and" is common in colloquial speech, but "'try to'" is recommended for writing.
Suggestion: try to
...amatically. Thus, the owner may want to try and find other amenities that are likely to...
^^^^^^^
Line 16, column 74, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'showerheads'' or 'showerhead's'?
Suggestion: showerheads'; showerhead's
...ather than just doing trials like these showerheads modification. Thus, the argument put...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, may, so, then, third, thus, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1991.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 387.0 441.139720559 88% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14470284238 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43534841618 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81430582713 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514211886305 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 622.8 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.4857821191 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.733333333 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.46666666667 5.70786347227 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 15.0 5.15768463074 291% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
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: 0.236900015477 0.218282227539 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0825926452088 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0961944932554 0.0701772020484 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0600841721147 0.128457276422 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0756200763006 0.0628817314937 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 14.3799401198 109% => 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: 12.83 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.