The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.
"Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little impact on our customers. In fact, only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The about argument asserts that there had been a replacement of butter by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurant throughout the southwestern US. And, there had been less impact on costumer. Further, what the argument says that the number of costumer who used to previously ask for butter are not complaining when they are given margarine instead. Thus the author concludes that those costumer who used to ask for butter previously are either don’t distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term butter to either butter or margarine. I contempt that the above argument is dubious. The author does not research on the costumer on the respect that are the liking the margarine or not and on other aspect the argument lacks the research on the food they are provided. However, the pancake might not have used butter.
Firstly, the author lacks the research on whether the margarine they are using in the pancakes are real margarine or butter. In the above argument it is likely to be relying only on the costumer. There may also occur that the manager is considering that margarine is used but not all of the pancake have been made using the margarine. Because, there might be like butter is cheap than margarine so they might be using butter. However, the survey assumes that 2 percent of costumer have complained about that but there might be rest costumer are not getting the pancake with margarine. So, the manager should asses that whether all the pancakes are made of margarine.
Secondly, the author is wanting on the respect that some costumer who used to have butter pancakes might have liked the pancakes with margarine. The research on this basis is lacking. For instance, it often happens to us also if we order something and the different comes but we happen to eat those and find it more delicious so didn’t complain. Moreover, this might have also been happening on the above condition. Therefore, the author conclusion might mendacious in this respect, since those who liked margarine that but would not complain on it.
Finally, the manager readily assumes that the costumer who don’t complain on the replacement of the butter with pancakes are because they are oblivious about the difference in these two. However , it might be something like , some costumer have so much trust on some brand or company what they produce or what they make is appreciated by them. So, the author also must account those costumers and come to the conclusion on generalization.
In the conclusion, the above argument lacks persuasiveness in the respect of costumers liking because as we discussed above the costumer have liked the change and they might not be complaining about. So, to bolster the above argument the manager need to have deliberate research on the costumer’s review and also asses that whether all the pancake are using the real margarine or not.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 488 350
No. of Characters: 2336 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.7 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.787 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.486 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.217 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.954 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.652 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.351 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.514 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 353, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... when they are given margarine instead. Thus the author concludes that those costume...
^^^^
Line 3, column 281, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...sidering that margarine is used but not all of the pancake have been made using the margar...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 22, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...e of margarine. Secondly, the author is wanting on the respect that some costumer who u...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 200, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...out the difference in these two. However , it might be something like , some costu...
^^
Line 7, column 229, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...wo. However , it might be something like , some costumer have so much trust on som...
^^
Line 9, column 391, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ke are using the real margarine or not.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2420.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 485.0 441.139720559 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98969072165 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61824454866 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.369072164948 0.468620217663 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 774.9 705.55239521 110% => 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: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.1861943228 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.217391304 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0869565217 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194780244573 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.078635968393 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0957014605128 0.0701772020484 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118397277409 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0729136629273 0.0628817314937 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.12 8.32208582834 86% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.