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.
The argument of the given prompt assumes that the Mason City residents’ preference on water sports over other recreational activities will cause an increased demand for riverside recreational facilities once the Mason River is cleaned with the state funding. Although it may be true that founding more riverside recreational facilities can benefit some of the Mason City residents who are enthusiastic in water sports, this argument is rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to increased funding.
Most parts of this article rely on survey results questioning Mason City residents about their favorite recreational activities. However, since the validity of these surveys is never verified, no one can guarantee the validity of the article’s argument either. The prompt does not provide a link to the full surveys, nor does it show how many residents of which age range and social stance the surveys studied. The author will have to show the validity of the surveys before making an assumption that the surveys can prove anything.
Also, when relating the Mason City residents’ demands on water sports facilities with the necessity for more funding, the author does not clarify the benefit of satisfying the needs of the residents. He, or she, quotes the surveys that asked Mason City residents whether they favor water sports over other recreational activities, but shows no evidence that the residents are willing to spend any meaningful budget on water sports. Thus, it is not clear whether more budget on riverside recreational facilities is going to bring an economic benefit to the Mason City government.
Since there is only a limited budget that the city government can utilize in a year, it is a complicated problem to which business and of which portion the government should distribute its budget. Although the given prompt makes a plausible point on that more budget for riverside recreational facilities may cause a few beneficial effects, it fails to persuade its readers to devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 354, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...ide recreational facilities can benefit some of the Mason City residents who are enthusiast...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'thus']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.285326086957 0.25644967241 111% => OK
Verbs: 0.133152173913 0.15541462614 86% => OK
Adjectives: 0.100543478261 0.0836205057962 120% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0380434782609 0.0520304965353 73% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0298913043478 0.0272364105082 110% => OK
Prepositions: 0.108695652174 0.125424944231 87% => OK
Participles: 0.0298913043478 0.0416121511921 72% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.8722620927 2.79052419416 103% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0298913043478 0.026700313972 112% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.122282608696 0.113004496875 108% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0244565217391 0.0255425247493 96% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0190217391304 0.0127820249294 149% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2099.0 2731.13054187 77% => OK
No of words: 333.0 446.07635468 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.3033033033 6.12365571057 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.57801047555 93% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.369369369369 0.378187486979 98% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.3003003003 0.287650121315 104% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.219219219219 0.208842608468 105% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.153153153153 0.135150697306 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8722620927 2.79052419416 103% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 207.018472906 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.495495495495 0.469332199767 106% => OK
Word variations: 50.8902304055 52.1807786196 98% => OK
How many sentences: 11.0 20.039408867 55% => OK
Sentence length: 30.2727272727 23.2022227129 130% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.5786306088 57.7814097925 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 190.818181818 141.986410481 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.2727272727 23.2022227129 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.636363636364 0.724660767414 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 60.3027573028 51.9672348444 116% => OK
Elegance: 2.10810810811 1.8405768891 115% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.422767990082 0.441005458295 96% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.195130474369 0.135418324435 144% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0737034782529 0.0829849096947 89% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.665017384958 0.58762219726 113% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.136674549496 0.147661913831 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.218765215108 0.193483328276 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0795212422211 0.0970749176394 82% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.416543301091 0.42659136922 98% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0472793733627 0.0774707102158 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.311158192529 0.312017818177 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0901906508616 0.0698173142475 129% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.87684729064 29% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 1.0 5.36822660099 19% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.82389162562 71% => OK
Total topic words: 9.0 14.657635468 61% => 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: 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.