In this argument, the author maintains that, the symphony has succeeded in finding an audience; hence, the city could abate the funding of the symphony. Although it seems convincing at the first glance; nevertheless, this argument fails to be completely compelling, for it contains a series of unwarranted assumptions and due to the lack of necessary evidence.
First of all, the arguer simply assumes that the symphony hired an internationally prominent conductor who is able to attract high-profile guest musicians to perform. Without offering the tenable evidence, the arguer could not back up this fundamental assumption, although it is not entirely impossible. It is also likely that the cooperation with the high-profile guest musicians is transient because of lacking long-term contract. For example these guest musicians come to the performance just for advocating their own show, and they merely perform limited songs in the symphony. If they don't have any performance to be advocated, they might not perform in the symphony, and the number of audiences would decrease. In order to strengthen this argument, the author should provide more credible evidence, and rule out and account for other and alternative explanations.
What is more, the author assumes that the private contributions to the symphony have tripled and the attendance at the symphony's outdoor summer concert series has reached record highs. It is equally possible that the private contribution could be lost or reduced in the future. For instance, an economical crisis would seriously impact the income of the private contributors. For the sake of saving the expenditure for life, they might choose to cut off the sponsorship to the symphony. Moreover, future concert might not be able to attract sufficient amount of audiences to support the expenses to support the symphony. As a result, the author should provide more persuasive and professional evidence to substantiate the assumption. For any of those scenarios, if true, would undoubtedly weaken the argument.
Finally, even though the assumptions on which the argument is based are true, the conclusion merely relies on the assumption that the symphony has succeeded in finding an audience, the city could eliminate the funding of the symphony. Thus, it is not entirely unreasonable to question the author's conclusion. For example, current audiences are attracted primarily because of the new conductor, if the conductor chooses to attend another symphony and leave the current team, the audiences may be disappointed, and turn to watch the shows of the other symphony teams. Lacking this indispensable evidence, the author clearly could not firmly bolster the argument.
To sum up, the argument is not as valid as it seems, for it lakes necessary evidence and sound reasoning. To better evaluate the author's conclusion, it is critical to provide more persuasive and unbiased evidence, sound rigidly, and rule out potential explanations.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 466 350
No. of Characters: 2449 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.646 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.255 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.881 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 194 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 160 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 116 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.19 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.725 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.322 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.505 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.06 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 591, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... limited songs in the symphony. If they dont have any performance to be advocated, t...
^^^^
Line 5, column 296, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...reduced in the future. For instance, an economical crisis would seriously impact the incom...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 290, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...t entirely unreasonable to question the authors conclusion. For example, current audien...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 130, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...sound reasoning. To better evaluate the authors conclusion, it is critical to provide m...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, then, thus, for example, for instance, as a result, first of all, to sum up, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2519.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 465.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41720430108 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98161476262 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483870967742 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 784.8 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.928849383 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.952380952 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1428571429 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.61904761905 5.70786347227 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => 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: 0.0894871878388 0.218282227539 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0274036673855 0.0743258471296 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0315296288958 0.0701772020484 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0559240641659 0.128457276422 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0285422302544 0.0628817314937 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.