In the memo from the vice president of a company, it stated that Alpha Construction Company should be used for its new building work instead of Zeta. The recommendation is based on the premise that Zeta is more expensive than Alpha in cost and maintenance. However, this argument is based on three unwarranted assumptions that if not hampers its effectiveness.
First of all, the author of the argument assumes that what obtained ten years ago still exists today. It is possible that there is a change at present, perhaps Zeta has reduced its costs for construction of building which might be cheaper than Alpha, and it is also possible that Zeta has found alternative energy form which is cost effective as opposed to what holds ten years ago and the cheap. Furthermore, it is possible that Alpha construction Company has revised their budget for building and is now more expensive than it was in the last decade. If either of this is the case, the conclusion that Alpha should be used other than Zeta does not hold water and should be dismissed.
Secondly, the author of the argument assumes that regions in which the new buildings were constructed were similar in terms of building materials cost. However, this might not be the case, the cost of building in each region might differ. For instance, the cost of building and maintenance may be high in the region where Zeta worked if the cost of materials such as wood, cement, sand etc. were high. It is also possible that Zeta could not reduce the cost of their constructing and maintenance because the region does not allow Constructors of building to get materials outside the region. If any of these holds water, then choosing Alpha over Zeta should be dismissed.
Lastly, the author assumes that the same number of people work in both Companies that Zeta and Alpha Constructed ten years ago. The companies may have the same plans and structure with regards to its construction, yet the number of employee might differ. For example, there is a potential that Zeta building had more employees which accounted for the higher energy consumption as opposed to Alpha building. It is also possible that the equipment used in Zeta building are more energy consuming than those found in Alpha building. If this is true, recommending Alpha might not be justifiable.
In conclusion,even though it is possible that using Alpha is more cost effective than Zeta. However, as it stands now, the argument relies on three unfounded assumptions that renders its conclusion unpersuasive at best and specious at worst. Thus, the author needs to provide more data by conducting a research at the moment to know which company would be best fit for their construction plan.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 461 350
No. of Characters: 2203 1500
No. of Different Words: 189 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.634 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.779 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.576 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 138 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.05 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.749 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.9 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.352 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.555 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.117 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 14, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , even
...ght not be justifiable. In conclusion,even though it is possible that using Alpha ...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 301, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'research'.
Suggestion: research
...eeds to provide more data by conducting a research at the moment to know which company wou...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 13.6137724551 162% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2263.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 460.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91956521739 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6785881717 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.417391304348 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 684.9 705.55239521 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.8274306488 57.8364921388 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.15 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.8 5.70786347227 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => 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: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.275049927175 0.218282227539 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0957287798825 0.0743258471296 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0638178382086 0.0701772020484 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17161288664 0.128457276422 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0532838274475 0.0628817314937 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.