“The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area. Although only a small percentage of the land will be sold to Smith, the proposed development will have disastrous consequences for our area. The company plans to build a small hotel on the land. Although they have promised to ensure the preservation of the sanctuary, there is no way that their plans will do anything but harm the sanctuary. There are no circumstances under which this sale will benefit our community, which relies on tourists who visit.”
In the petition sent by the environmental protection group to the residents of Youngtown, the environmentalists allege that the Smith Corporation must not be permitted to develop the land which was a part of Wildlife Preserve. This is because this sale will not benefit the community under any circumstances and will inturn have disastrous consequences. Though the argument put forth by the environmentalists seems legit, there are many loopholes, unstated facts and assumptions which will weaken the argument.
To begin with, the sactuary preserves the survival of 300 bird species living in that area and a small percentage of land is given for development. But the total area of land and the percentage of land which is planned to provide were not mentioned. If the area is too large and there is negligible amount of land which is given for development, there might not be any disastrous consequences which threat the wild life. On the other hand, if the area is too small and if the development will come up with factories which release some toxic chemicals in the surroundings which will deteriorate the health of the birds, then it would be a threatening consequence. However, the area of the land, the amount which was given and the type of the diastrous consequences were not mentioned.
Secondly, the author alleges that the company plans to to build a small hotel on the land. There is also mention that the community relies on the sanctuary which is a famous tourist destination. In general, if a hotel is constructed it would benefit the community. But the author mentions that there are no circumstances under which this plan would be successful. If there are no hotels in that area, which is a tourist spot, it would help the community economically. In contrast if, there are already many hotels existing it might not be a good plan. In any way the is no mention about these two conundrums. Had the author provided strong reasons for these problems, it would have been a valid point.
Lastly, the Smith Corporation has already promised to ensure the preservation of the sanctuary. If this is true, then there will not be any disastrous consequences for the sanctuary. If not, there must be a mention of what kind of promises were made. Are the plans of the corporation going to be beguile to the sanctuary? If yes, then what are the steps taken to preserve the wild life? For example, if the community provides better facilities to the people who are working around the area, then it would benefit the community.
To conclude, though the author mentions many arguments regarding the consequences of permitting the corporation to develop the land, there are no solid assumptions which buttress the argument. Had the author provided the amount of area, kind of disastrous consequences and valid reasons for the assumption that the plan would not benefit the community, the argument would have been a cogent one.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 53, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: to
...e author alleges that the company plans to to build a small hotel on the land. There ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 472, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: contrast,
...uld help the community economically. In contrast if, there are already many hotels exist...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, lastly, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, for example, in contrast, in general, kind of, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2443.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 494.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94534412955 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71445763274 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89885398444 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.404858299595 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 755.1 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 2.70958083832 369% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.6933902663 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.791666667 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5833333333 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 5.70786347227 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.207644611885 0.218282227539 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0650306819476 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0703816470863 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116781353908 0.128457276422 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0504577748319 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.67 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.