The argument stands on a number of unstated assumptions in it's recommendation that funding to the Grandview Symphony Orchestra be halted. The argument support's itself by taking support of the several facts, the increase in private funding, more people attending shows, and a future price increase that is hoped to increase revenue for the orchestra. Taken as a whole, the unstated assumptions render the argument highly suspect. Indeed, if the assumptions do not hold true the argument totally falls apart.
To begin with, the recommendation assumes that the funding for the orchestra from private contributor's is significant, it will continue for the next year as well, and a two hundred percent increase is significant. As,it is not clearly stated in the memo we are unsure whether private contributions make a significant chunk of revenue of the orchestar. It may be the case that private funding could just account for a mere one percent of the total revenue or it might account a large chunk of it. However, if former is the case then stopping funding would ultimately create financial troubles for the orchestra. Additionally, it also unclear that the private funding will continue in following years as well. It can so happen that due to inflation or economic downturn the private funding may be decreased or in worst case even cease. As we cannot predict future this assumption is very weak. Moreover, we are informed that there has been a two hundred percent increase in the private funding. It may be the case that it is a two hundred percent increase from 2000 to 4000 dollars or 20,000 to 40,000 dollars increase. If it is the former case, in absolute terms it would be a meager increase in funding and even if it continues for the next year it would still remain ineffectual. Thus, without a proper detail of the revenue streams of the orchestra to support these assumptions, the author's argument falls apart.
Secondly, the recommendation assumes that since the attendance has doubled and ticket prices will be increaesed, more people will come to the theatre again, and the revenue from the ticket sales next year should be a large stream of revenue for the orchestra to sustain. Since we are are not aware whether of the primary reason behind more attendance at theatre it is wrong to assume that the orchestra would enjoy more or even atleast same number of audience the next year it is wrong to assume that more people wil come next year. It may be the case that more people are coming because a nearby famous theatre has been closed, or the cinema's are out of business that may have caused people to come flooding to the theatre. If any of the aforementioned scenario would cease to be,i.e. other theatre's reopen or cinema's come back in business, in the next year it is very likely that seats at the orchestra remain vaccant. Furhtermore, it is pointed out that the prices of tickets will b increased to justify halting funding. It may be the case that revenue from the tickets is not a major part of the revenue while annunal funding is and increase in the prices of the ticket might not be enough for orchestra to sustain in the coming years. Hence, without knowing the proper reason for sudden increase in orchestra attendance and understanding the finances from tikcet revenue to support these asumptions, the author's argument falls apart.
In conclusion, it can be said that the argument makes a number of unstated assumptions that seriously undermine it's validity. Unless these assumptions are addressed the argument falls apart.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 12 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 606 350
No. of Characters: 2908 1500
No. of Different Words: 230 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.962 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.799 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.603 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 224 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 167 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 94 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.91 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.319 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.478 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.137 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 217, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , it
...dred percent increase is significant. As,it is not clearly stated in the memo we ar...
^^^
Line 3, column 809, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'in the worst'.
Suggestion: in the worst
...the private funding may be decreased or in worst case even cease. As we cannot predict f...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 835, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” 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.
... decreased or in worst case even cease. As we cannot predict future this assumptio...
^^
Line 3, column 1386, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...estra to support these assumptions, the authors argument falls apart. Secondly, the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 281, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: are
... for the orchestra to sustain. Since we are are not aware whether of the primary reason...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 781, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , i
...forementioned scenario would cease to be,i.e. other theatres reopen or cinemas com...
^^
Line 5, column 1410, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...evenue to support these asumptions, the authors argument falls apart. In conclusion,...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Unless” 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.
... that seriously undermine its validity. Unless these assumptions are addressed the arg...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, then, thus, well, while, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.6327345309 178% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.9520958084 178% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 28.8173652695 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2960.0 2260.96107784 131% => OK
No of words: 604.0 441.139720559 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90066225166 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.95746018188 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66116827484 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.395695364238 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 926.1 705.55239521 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.7189634332 57.8364921388 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.333333333 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1666666667 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.114930654172 0.218282227539 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.038585943154 0.0743258471296 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0394561098609 0.0701772020484 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0667005259371 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406861500307 0.0628817314937 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.44 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 98.500998004 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.