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
The argument topics stated that it is needed to make a budget for recreational activities around the riverside. To bolster this conclusion, author makes many assumptions. Author argues that after adding water related recreational activities rivers will be clean. This looks like a simple and easy going idea but in fact it is not that simple as mentioned by this prompt. There are several unforeseen aspects in this argument.
First of all, author claims that direct concern about the river by local residents really help to develop the river's water quality.This seems foolhardy assumption since this assumption still could not remove the many confusion. Why river becomes sordid? What are the major factors affecting the natural beauty of river? Are you sure if recreational activities get started then quality of water will improve.
Secondly, water of that river is malodorous and dirty; however, who are the responsible for these types of problem. There is no any risk to establish the entertain scenario. Sometimes entertainment activities brings the dirty environment. In order to obliterated that type of problem by using cleaning campaign.
Thirdly, what are the others process of cleaning the river. Other best methods can solve this conundrum. Author provide the evidence that government can provide furn to solve this problem, but in fact, perhaps there are others serious problems may have arise. If we make recreational activities which effect the temporarily of their studies because they loss their crucial time by playing water games.
To recapitulate, it is vulnerable to arise other problem. Before implement this policy, further details research is needed. Because careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it merely supports the argument, this argument is incomplete.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 131, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...elp to develop the rivers water quality.This seems foolhardy assumption since this a...
^^^^
Line 2, column 212, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun confusion seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much confusion', 'a good deal of confusion'.
Suggestion: much confusion; a good deal of confusion
...s assumption still could not remove the many confusion. Why river becomes sordid? What are the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 125, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...le for these types of problem. There is no any risk to establish the entertain sce...
^^
Line 3, column 150, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...blem. There is no any risk to establish the entertain scenario. Sometimes entertainment activ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 253, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'arisen'.
Suggestion: arisen
...re are others serious problems may have arise. If we make recreational activities whi...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 240, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... argument, this argument is incomplete.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, look, may, really, second, secondly, so, still, then, third, thirdly, in fact, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1516.0 2260.96107784 67% => OK
No of words: 280.0 441.139720559 63% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41428571429 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7192060666 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.617857142857 0.468620217663 132% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 705.55239521 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 22.8473053892 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.5273544147 57.8364921388 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.8 119.503703932 63% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.0 23.324526521 60% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.70786347227 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.101501900943 0.218282227539 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0299822004104 0.0743258471296 40% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0367325829476 0.0701772020484 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0558327822118 0.128457276422 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0324188185866 0.0628817314937 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.3799401198 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 48.81 48.3550499002 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.51 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 98.500998004 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 11.1389221557 68% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.