By recommending the government of Tagus to promote the new breed of millet, the argument suggests that it would reduce the deficiency of vitamin A among the people in Tagus. However, there are many fallacies to this recommendation and many factors can divest the reduction of deficiency of vitamin A.
First of all, the argument itself says that, the seed for this new breed of millet is costly. Tagus is an impoverished nation and many of the farmers living here will be reluctant to pay more for this new breed of millet. Farmers are likely to live in hand to mouth, therefore, naturally they are very economical for their expenses. Assenting the farmers for cultivating this new breed of millet will be challenging. The argument should suggest what should be done by government for making the farmers happy to buy this new seed of millet. Also, the government can provide initial bulk of seeds in compensating rates, so that the increased rate would not overwhelm the poor farmers.
Even if the farmers are agree to buy this new breed of seeds, nurturing and cultivating this new type of millet can be challenging for the farmers. The government should take necessary steps also to educate farmers about different aspects of cultivating the new breed of millet.
And the last of all, the argument doesn't provide any evidence that, the new breed of millet will manage to reduce the deficiency of vitamin A of the people of Tagus. The claim from the international development is vague and also the argument doesn't provide any the acceptability of this development organization. The argument should clarify exactly what the organization is, how well their claim can be granted by the international health standard, how the organization conduct their researches and provide research results and last but not least, what was their experimental samples for inferring the applicability of this new millet breed.
The argument provides a suspicious suggestion to the government of Tagus, depending only a vague claim of an unknown international development organization. There are plenty of ways to eradicate the deficiency of vitamin A, but this type of suspicious claim is clearly not meant to reduce deficiency, but to provide cheap profit for that international development organization.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 25, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'agreed'.
Suggestion: agreed
... poor farmers. Even if the farmers are agree to buy this new breed of seeds, nurturi...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 35, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...let. And the last of all, the argument doesnt provide any evidence that, the new bree...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 242, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...elopment is vague and also the argument doesnt provide any the acceptability of this d...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...pplicability of this new millet breed. The argument provides a suspicious suggesti...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'therefore', 'well', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.253694581281 0.25644967241 99% => OK
Verbs: 0.142857142857 0.15541462614 92% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0985221674877 0.0836205057962 118% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0418719211823 0.0520304965353 80% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0172413793103 0.0272364105082 63% => OK
Prepositions: 0.125615763547 0.125424944231 100% => OK
Participles: 0.0369458128079 0.0416121511921 89% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.94827655407 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0320197044335 0.026700313972 120% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.133004926108 0.113004496875 118% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0320197044335 0.0255425247493 125% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.012315270936 0.0127820249294 96% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2286.0 2731.13054187 84% => OK
No of words: 374.0 446.07635468 84% => OK
Chars per words: 6.11229946524 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3976220399 4.57801047555 96% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.368983957219 0.378187486979 98% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.27807486631 0.287650121315 97% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.187165775401 0.208842608468 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.149732620321 0.135150697306 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94827655407 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 207.018472906 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.422459893048 0.469332199767 90% => OK
Word variations: 43.6266912619 52.1807786196 84% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 20.039408867 75% => OK
Sentence length: 24.9333333333 23.2022227129 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.1946384434 57.7814097925 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.4 141.986410481 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9333333333 23.2022227129 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.6 0.724660767414 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 52.7408199643 51.9672348444 101% => OK
Elegance: 2.06097560976 1.8405768891 112% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.536633929142 0.441005458295 122% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.196448586158 0.135418324435 145% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0889374419329 0.0829849096947 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.702539642143 0.58762219726 120% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.144957205518 0.147661913831 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.276746684546 0.193483328276 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0977237055538 0.0970749176394 101% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.541724982609 0.42659136922 127% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0854409879871 0.0774707102158 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.387948738409 0.312017818177 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0576451343562 0.0698173142475 83% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.