The following is a letter to the head of the tourism bureau on the island of Tria.
"Erosion of beach sand along the shores of Tria Island is a serious threat to our island and our
tourist industry. In order to stop the erosion, we should charge people for using the beaches.
Although this solution may annoy a few tourists in the short term, it will reduce the number of
people using the beaches and will raise money for replenishing the sand. Replenishing the
sand, as was done to protect buildings on the nearby island of Batia, will help protect buildings
along our shores, thereby reducing these buildings' risk of additional damage from severe
storms. And since the areas along the shore will be more attractive as a result, the beaches
will be preserved and the area's tourist industry will improve over the long term."
This letter's author recommends charging fees for public access to Tria's beaches
The head of the tourism bureau on the island of Tria posits that they should deal with the crisis of erosion along the beaches of Tria by charging the tourists for accessing and using the beach. He is convinced that the charges would affect the crowd flux in and out of the beach by reducing the number of people willing to visit the beach, and also generate revenue to carry out revivifiaction of the beach. Though the author's suppositions are in goodwill but are conjectural and seems to be based on unwarranted assumptions. The author should the clarifications for the following three concerns to strengthen his argument and make a cogent case.
Will annoying the tourists by charging beach usage fairs cause no long term negative effects? It is possible that the tourists would be discouraged by the charges and would not prefer visiting the beach of Tria. As the author mentions in the argument that the island of Batia is a nearby island and peraps, there are several other islands that offer similar experience as Tria, then it would be deleterious for the tourism of Tria. Tourists might prefer nearby islands that have lower or no charges imposed for beach usage. Thus, the author must provide clarify that if there is any competitbe islands that exist nearby like for example, The island of Batia which might hijack the tourism business of Tria.
Are there any geological and geographical differences between Tria and the island of Batia? Perhaps the geological conditions of Batia for example the type of sand and associated compatibility of the wildlife of Batia differ from that of Tria. Not all islands have similar sands and beaches. The difference in sand causes respective differences in the natural fauna associated with them, and their availability. Moreover if the location of Batia is geographically more convenient than Tria then the logistical and trasportation of sand will be easier and cheaper. The geographical location of an island can also either facilitate or hinder the process of replenishing the beaches. Thus, the author must provide detailed insights about the geological and geographical differences between the two islands which might affect the replenishing endeavour.
Are the buildings in risk due to the eroding beach only. The salty and moist atmosphere perhaps are even more detrimental for the buildings and their structural integrity than the eroding sand. It is possible that buildings as usual built on solid concrete bases are far more at risk due to corrosion from salty and moist weather conditions than the erosion itself. The author must investigate this issue with the help of professional support so that the funds can be put to use in a more efficient manner and only if it is required.
In conclusion, the above concerns and reasonings limns the infirmity of the argument. The author must consider assessing the hindrance it might cause on long-term if the there are nearby islands that the tourist might possibly find more convenient. The author must investigate the affects the geological and geographical aspects of the Island of Tria can have on his endeavors of revivification of the beach and also investigate the primary reason that can compromise the integrity of the buildings in Tria. If the author is able to intrapolate the above angles in his argument, he or she can make a cogent case.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 558 350
No. of Characters: 2762 1500
No. of Different Words: 234 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.86 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.95 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.739 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 188 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.25 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.221 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.542 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.301 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.301 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.12 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 412, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...ated with them, and their availability. Moreover if the location of Batia is geographica...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 212, Rule ID: MIGHT_PERHAPS[1]
Message: Use simply 'might', 'possibly'.
Suggestion: might; possibly
...ere are nearby islands that the tourist might possibly find more convenient. The author must i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 212, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'might'.
Suggestion: might
...ere are nearby islands that the tourist might possibly find more convenient. The author must i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, moreover, so, then, thus, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 23.0 12.9520958084 178% => OK
Conjunction : 26.0 11.1786427146 233% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2802.0 2260.96107784 124% => OK
No of words: 558.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02150537634 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.86024933743 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77145308411 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.421146953405 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 871.2 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.1775232782 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.75 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.25 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.79166666667 5.70786347227 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => 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: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32666433602 0.218282227539 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0985313709144 0.0743258471296 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0991182970967 0.0701772020484 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185543834298 0.128457276422 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10545952715 0.0628817314937 168% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.