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 little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river’s water and the river’s smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is therefore sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year’s budget to riverside recreational facilities.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
Although author offers a proposal for increasing the money of year budget in Manson city for recreational side, it has some statement which is not logical. At first, survey always reflects the view of people opinion. It should be more details and concise meaning of general people aspect. But author statement does not reflect any of its. Moreover survey did not conclude any clear realization of city dweller.
Again, it implies that the river has a little use of swimming, boating, and fishing; then how the river could be polluted and smelly. There is no clear statement about why city residents want recreational park near the riverside. If recreational park is built near the river grater people come to river and it will be more polluted. The city resident wants water sports in the river but they rarely pursuit, which means they have little interest of these sports if they actually want to enjoy these sports they could go to the neighboring city.
Moreover, city park department devote a little of its budget to maintain riverside recreational facility which is might be illogical. Because the river is already polluted then how this little budget could help the park and attracted the people. However, for recreational park government will devote more money which is unnecessary because for these budget the other important project budget would be cut off. The mansion city already need a financial support for the recreational facility that means resident of these city not so rich then who will be going to the high rated park. The government announced that they have a plan to clean the river but not gave confirmation which means they have financial shortage than how they confirm for recreational park, these does not make any sense at all.
Examining the various reasoning and factors the budget does not justify for increasing budget. For proposal justify some more and reasoning information required for further action.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 321 350
No. of Characters: 1589 1500
No. of Different Words: 154 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.233 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.95 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.477 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 111 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 78 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 52 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.062 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.906 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.688 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.341 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.547 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.075 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 340, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
... statement does not reflect any of its. Moreover survey did not conclude any clear reali...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 55.5748502994 41% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1625.0 2260.96107784 72% => OK
No of words: 321.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06230529595 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52568640528 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 204.123752495 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.485981308411 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 499.5 705.55239521 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8723370216 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.5625 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0625 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.6875 5.70786347227 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.30044996028 0.218282227539 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0994590916594 0.0743258471296 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.067134551751 0.0701772020484 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168520940134 0.128457276422 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0879640809847 0.0628817314937 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 98.500998004 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.