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 these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
This excerpt argues that the city park department should provide more of its budget to develop water sports activities alongside the Mason River. The basis for this argument is provided by responses of Mason City residents to surveys about their preferred recreational activities. Results of these surveys seem to reveal than water sports are among the favorites in this regard. State plans to clean the Mason River have been already announced, and, thus, the writer claims that people would be more likely to use the river for water sports.
This argument is largely based on the assumption that the fact respondents ranked water sports among their favorite hobbies is the same as being likely to actively practice water sports on a frequent basis. If most of the respondents who ranked water sports higher are actually people who practice water sports or are willing to take them up as a hobby, then the market for water sports in Mason River is large enough to justify an investment. However, as little information about these surveys is provided, one could easily argue that, for example, a respondent could rank swimming higher than other activities because he likes to watch swimming races, but might not be or interested in being actively involved with it. If the aforementioned assumption does not hold true, this would mean that the number of Mason City residents willing to practice water sports is much smaller than the one reflected on these surveys.
The writer also assumes that Mason City residents who would like to be actively involved with water sports, would be interested in practicing them in Mason River. This might not be true for people living a long way from the Mason River, or people who have been already practicing water sports elsewhere and are not interested in moving their activities to the river. Even if the state cleans up the river, the number of people who would participate in these activities might not be as large as the surveys suggest.
This is not to suggest that the city park department should not devote a larger share of its budget to utilizing the Mason River for recreational activities. If the aforementioned assumptions hold true, then such an investment could be truly beneficial for the local community. However, the validity of these statements should be carefully examined before moving on with such actions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 279, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'peopled'.
Suggestion: peopled
...ranked water sports higher are actually people who practice water sports or are willin...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, so, then, thus, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
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: 1980.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 394.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02538071066 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53703024344 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.434010152284 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 621.9 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 28.0 22.8473053892 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 48.888252418 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.428571429 119.503703932 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.1428571429 23.324526521 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.35714285714 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.364155448553 0.218282227539 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.155699046488 0.0743258471296 209% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0871764321409 0.0701772020484 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.257729542838 0.128457276422 201% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0778414402055 0.0628817314937 124% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 48.3550499002 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.1389221557 119% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.