sea otter of the Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria
The first look of the argument seems entirely true, convincing and matches with the nowadays’ popular ovation “Go-Green”. At the first sight to the above letter, you will agree with the author that authorities should prohibit and ban the building of a road along the edge of Wetlands. However, as we go deep into the matter, we can easily grasp many flaws and realize that the argument lacks the vital evidences to validate its claim.
First of all, the argument considers what had happened to the sea otter of the Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria will happen to the tufted groundhog. He didn’t take into consideration that even the name of sea otter prevails that they live in water, while the tufted groundhog lives in the ground. Thus, when Carpenteria allowed the revoke of the sanctuary, it might be that people started to build factories and houses across the sea and water became polluted and no longer livable. These possibilities may be the reason for the decline of the sea otter. On the other hand, groundhogs live on the ground and won’t be affected by such changes at the coastal areas. As long as we can’t confirm these claims, we need enough info about both creatures and their habitat to determine whether road development should be allowed or not.
Secondly, the letter claims that Carpenteria repealed its sanctuary status in 1978, which led to the decrease in sea otter. He didn’t mention any exact reason for that decline. Is it due to climate change? Or due to people’s bad behavior and hunting of sea otter? Or is it just a coincidence? He should’ve mentioned proper reasons to avoid ambiguity.
Furthermore, Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. And there’s no enough data about the current status and numbers of groundhogs. Maybe groundhogs have become extinct before 2014 so West Lansburg was declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2004. Thus, there’s no particular basis upon which road establishment should be prohibited.
Finally, the argument didn’t mention the reason behind constructing a road along the edge of wetlands. He must have mentioned the reason behind that to strengthen his claim of denying the permission. On the other hand, the road could turn out to be useful in maintaining the biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment of wetlands.
Thus due to the overstated flaws, the argument seems to be ill-founded. However, if the author had mentioned enough evidence and stats, then the argument would have been infallible. But as of now, the authenticity of the argument falls flat due to the insufficiency of the data provided.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 333, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... ground. Thus, when Carpenteria allowed the revoke of the sanctuary, it might be that peop...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e a healthy environment of wetlands. Thus due to the overstated flaws, the argume...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, then, thus, while, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2253.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 435.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17931034483 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96775643876 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542528735632 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 674.1 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.4314663028 57.8364921388 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.12 119.503703932 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4 23.324526521 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.178834751338 0.218282227539 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0491178728128 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.099774834268 0.0701772020484 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0770086646708 0.128457276422 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.113148998235 0.0628817314937 180% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.3550499002 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 98.500998004 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.