The author of the argument states that in response to the Vitamin A deficiency in the people of Tagus, and with the upcoming of an international organization with a new variety of millet able to curb the deficiency, the government must promote this new type of millet. However, this argument is based on several assumptions and is thus flawed.
First of all, the author states that the international organization came up with new variety of millet which has potential to curb the vitamin A deficiency. But it is unclear what are the plans of the organization. Does to organization aims to sell it's millet in other countries? If that is so, then the citizens of Tagus will not be benefited from the cultivation of the new type of millet. It is important to know what is the target market for the company, in order to support the author’s recommendation.
Also, the author has broadly stated that there is deficiency of Vitamin A in the citizens of Tagus, but there is no confirmation of the fact in the argument. What are the tests carried out for detection of the deficiency? What percentage of the total population are affected? Which age group of the total population is suffering with the deficiency? Is the deficiency severe? Unless these questions are answered, it is difficult to back the author’s suggestion.
Also, it is unclear why the author has considered new variety of millet as the only possible cure. Are there any other methods to curb the problem of Vitamin deficiency? In most cases, Vitamin deficiency can be cured by taking vitamin supplements. Apart from that, other natural ways such as increasing the intake of vitamin A rich food can prove to be helpful. Have people tried those traditional methods? If yes, then were those methods of no use? It would be wise for the other to consider all those factors.
Moreover, the author that farming of the millet is costly and thus the seeds are subsidized and that the government of Tagus must support the cultivation of the new type of millet. But, the author doesn’t provide plans of the organization. Is the cultivation going to take place in Tagus? The government of Tagus cannot support the cultivation for another country. The author’s claim must provide the definite plans of the organization and how the citizens of Tagus will be benefited from the plan.
In general, it can be said that the author’s has failed to make a convincing argument. The writer’s argument ends with an entirely unjustified optimistic recommendation.
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 50
- In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes litt 79
- People attend college or university for many different reasons (for example, new experiences, career preparation, increased knowledge). Why do you think people attend college or university? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 60
- 151 Benton City residents have adopted healthier lifestyles. A recent survey of city residents shows that the eating habits of city residents conform more closely to government nutritional recommendations than they did ten years ago. During those ten year 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 10, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
...agus will be benefited from the plan. In general, it can be said that the auth...
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'so', 'then', 'thus', 'apart from', 'in general', 'such as', 'first of all', 'in most cases']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.257085020243 0.25644967241 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.145748987854 0.15541462614 94% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0748987854251 0.0836205057962 90% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0384615384615 0.0520304965353 74% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0161943319838 0.0272364105082 59% => OK
Prepositions: 0.127530364372 0.125424944231 102% => OK
Participles: 0.0323886639676 0.0416121511921 78% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.99950861839 2.79052419416 107% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0263157894737 0.026700313972 99% => OK
Particles: 0.00202429149798 0.001811407834 112% => OK
Determiners: 0.141700404858 0.113004496875 125% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0202429149798 0.0255425247493 79% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0141700404858 0.0127820249294 111% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2544.0 2731.13054187 93% => OK
No of words: 426.0 446.07635468 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97183098592 6.12365571057 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.326291079812 0.378187486979 86% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.260563380282 0.287650121315 91% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.18544600939 0.208842608468 89% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.140845070423 0.135150697306 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99950861839 2.79052419416 107% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 207.018472906 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.420187793427 0.469332199767 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 45.2364974321 52.1807786196 87% => OK
How many sentences: 27.0 20.039408867 135% => OK
Sentence length: 15.7777777778 23.2022227129 68% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.8762990518 57.7814097925 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.2222222222 141.986410481 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.7777777778 23.2022227129 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.518518518519 0.724660767414 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 41.8341158059 51.9672348444 81% => OK
Elegance: 2.08080808081 1.8405768891 113% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.429070335775 0.441005458295 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.135647163012 0.135418324435 100% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0811458515701 0.0829849096947 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.57035608789 0.58762219726 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.184177541136 0.147661913831 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164520146741 0.193483328276 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106088063237 0.0970749176394 109% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.470807862877 0.42659136922 110% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.169890969104 0.0774707102158 219% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.307442710725 0.312017818177 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105715126979 0.0698173142475 151% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.33743842365 120% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.87684729064 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.82512315271 124% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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: This is not the final score. 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.