A recent sales study indicated that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent over the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants that specialize in seafood. Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about eating healthily. Therefore, a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be quite popular and profitable.
In the above statement, the author asserts that since the major proportion of the families in Bay City are two-income families, with the nationwide concern for health, new Bay City restaurant's consumption of seafood will be popular and profitable. While supporting the argument, however, the author makes numerous assumptions which cannot be taken for granted. Thus, the argument remains largely unconvincing without further evidence to verify unjustified assumptions.
Firstly, the author assumes that the current condition in Bay City are will be permanent, not just a temporary trend. The author assumes that the cost for quarrying of the seafood will be constant over the years. However, it may not be the case. The sea animals could be endangered due to profound quarrying from the past, and now are hard to catch, which will raise the cost. For example, the restaurant could deliver their seafood from other cities, which subsumes delivery cost as well. Or, a governmental regulation could be invoked by limiting the quarry of the sea animals. In addition, the writer states that over the past 5 years, the consumption for the seafood in the restaurant has increased 30 percent. However, we cannot be sure whether it was a temporary trend or a permanent ambiance that will exist for years. There could have been a government regulator who initiated a seafood festival, or supported the seafood consumption aiming to rise up the seafood industry. However, that regulator could have resigned. Therefore, further evidence pertaining to whether the seafood consumption trend will be permanent or not is needed to support the claim and assert it.
Secondly, healthy food being sea food is not conclusively proven. The author gets the evidence from the nationwide survey that there is a nationwide concern for health and eating healthy is on the people's mind, which will lead to the rise of the sea food. However, the healthy food dos not mean directly consuming sea food solely. The Bay City residents could be sick of the seafood they have been consuming for their lives, and move onto other source of healthy food. The reason why there now is only one seafood restaurant is also needs to be validated. It could be because the residents predilection for the seafood have been removed. In addition, sea food could be even bad for the health due to the high sodium compared to other healthy foods. As such, more detailed data needs to be considered whether Bay City area regards healthy food as sea food and is willing to consume sea food for the future as well are needed to be warranted since the argument is largely based on it.
Lastly, the nationwide survey being adjustable to the Bay City area is not plausible without corroborating evidence. The nationwide survey insisted that the two-income families are apt to eat outside rather than inside. However, it may not be the case for the Bay City. Bay City could be a very small city inside a country that it's characteristics are hard to be represented in a nationwide survey. Although Bay City residents are aware of the consumption of healthy foods, they could acknowledge that home-cooked meals are way more healthier than eating outside. Then, the seafood restaurant will be suffering from loss in the near future. Therefore, it is necessary to consider evidence about whether the nationwide survey can be applied to the Bay City.
In sum, the author's claim is not very well supported in its current form. Further evidence pertaining to whether the current trend in Bay City are will be permanent, the seafood is regarded healthy, the nationwide survey being applicable to the Bay City area are crucial in determining the validity of the claim.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- duplicated to argument 3
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
flaws:
Need to be logically clear about the prompts.
Let's analyze the structure of the statement and argue accordingly:
condition 1:
A recent sales study indicated that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent over the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants that specialize in seafood. //maybe other restaurants serve sea foods together with other foods.
condition 2:
Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about eating healthily. //your argument 3
conclusion:
Therefore, a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be quite popular and profitable. //your argument 1, better to put it as argument 3
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 31 15
No. of Words: 618 350
No. of Characters: 3021 1500
No. of Different Words: 238 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.986 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.888 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.622 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 214 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 176 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 108 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 73 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.935 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.041 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.613 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.3 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.467 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
In the above statement, the author asser...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e to verify unjustified assumptions. Firstly, the author assumes that the cur...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to support the claim and assert it. Secondly, healthy food being sea food is...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 495, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ce of healthy food. The reason why there now is only one seafood restaurant is al...
^^
Line 5, column 587, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'residents'' or 'resident's'?
Suggestion: residents'; resident's
...o be validated. It could be because the residents predilection for the seafood have been ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he argument is largely based on it. Lastly, the nationwide survey being adju...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 534, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'healthier' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: healthier
...nowledge that home-cooked meals are way more healthier than eating outside. Then, the seafood ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...vey can be applied to the Bay City. In sum, the authors claim is not very we...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 80, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Further,
...ery well supported in its current form. Further evidence pertaining to whether the curr...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'firstly', 'however', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'thus', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'in addition']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.23795620438 0.25644967241 93% => OK
Verbs: 0.170802919708 0.15541462614 110% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0978102189781 0.0836205057962 117% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0627737226277 0.0520304965353 121% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0204379562044 0.0272364105082 75% => OK
Prepositions: 0.109489051095 0.125424944231 87% => OK
Participles: 0.0569343065693 0.0416121511921 137% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.68337095397 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.029197080292 0.026700313972 109% => OK
Particles: 0.0014598540146 0.001811407834 81% => OK
Determiners: 0.10802919708 0.113004496875 96% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0350364963504 0.0255425247493 137% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0102189781022 0.0127820249294 80% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3750.0 2731.13054187 137% => OK
No of words: 618.0 446.07635468 139% => OK
Chars per words: 6.06796116505 6.12365571057 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98594081286 4.57801047555 109% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.360841423948 0.378187486979 95% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.297734627832 0.287650121315 104% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.194174757282 0.208842608468 93% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.132686084142 0.135150697306 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68337095397 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Unique words: 251.0 207.018472906 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.406148867314 0.469332199767 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 48.9788741911 52.1807786196 94% => OK
How many sentences: 31.0 20.039408867 155% => OK
Sentence length: 19.935483871 23.2022227129 86% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.6514166236 57.7814097925 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.967741935 141.986410481 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.935483871 23.2022227129 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.548387096774 0.724660767414 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 3.58251231527 251% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 49.7089466541 51.9672348444 96% => OK
Elegance: 1.59195402299 1.8405768891 86% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.347602941419 0.441005458295 79% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.119952541183 0.135418324435 89% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0768638183152 0.0829849096947 93% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.538890812217 0.58762219726 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.147557139091 0.147661913831 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142571133748 0.193483328276 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0930201113923 0.0970749176394 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.566980363373 0.42659136922 133% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0290076443866 0.0774707102158 37% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.274213647864 0.312017818177 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0522056426605 0.0698173142475 75% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.33743842365 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.87684729064 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.82512315271 187% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 11.0 6.46551724138 170% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 9.0 2.82389162562 319% => OK
Total topic words: 27.0 14.657635468 184% => 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.