The argument posited above deals with two public parks Stanley park and the Carlton park. It is described in the argument that Stanley park attracted more people when it was opened but then even being large more people are attracted towards carlton park. The reason for this change in trends have been given by the arguer but some of them are not justifiable directly such as Stanley park is located in a town, while the Carlton park is located in the heart of the business district. In addition to that It is not possible to judge the number of people visiting the park just by checking the video footages from the cameras which are park's parking lot. Further the argument states that the difference in the number of seating between the two parks attract the visitors, but it cannot neceassarily the reason behind decrease in the number of visitors in the Stanley park.
It is possible that when the Stanley park was opened it was the only park between the town and the district, so people got more attracted toward the park. It has been stated in the argument that stanley park is located in the town while carlton park is located in the heart of the city. It can be assumed that number of people residing in the town is less than the number residing in the business district. So when the carlton park was opened in the district, more people visited it as it being nearby than the stanley park.Thus this assumption weakens the argument that number of benches is having any relation with the number of visitors.
In addition to that, it has been argued for the stanley park that the decrease in the visitors were registered on the basis of camera footages from the cameras mounted in the parking lot . It is necessary to assume that every visitor would not be travelling to the park in the car. So less number of cars parked in the parking lot does not clearly depict the decrease in the number of people visiting the stanley park.
Further, it is imoportant to note that it is not necessary that the difference in the number of benches in the two park is the sole reason of difference in the number of visitors in the two parks. It can be assumed that the carlton park might have other facilities that the stanley park would'nt have. This might also lead to a decrease in the number of people visiting the stanley park.
Finally, From the assumptions disccussed aboe it is not relevant to say that the only reason the stanley park could attract more visitors is by increasin the number of seating places. On the other hand it is important to note that the arguer has stated the cameras as the only source for reasoning for registering the number of visitors in the stanley park. So it is important to use other source to account for the exact number of people in the stanley park.
To sum up, these are the assumptions which the arguer should keep the hole of to make his/her argument more cogent.
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: Further the argument states that the difference in the number of seating between the two parks attract the visitors, but it cannot neceassarily the reason behind decrease in the number of visitors in the Stanley park.
Error: neceassarily Suggestion: necessarily
Sentence: Further, it is imoportant to note that it is not necessary that the difference in the number of benches in the two park is the sole reason of difference in the number of visitors in the two parks.
Error: imoportant Suggestion: important
Sentence: Finally, From the assumptions disccussed aboe it is not relevant to say that the only reason the stanley park could attract more visitors is by increasin the number of seating places.
Error: aboe Suggestion: able
Error: increasin Suggestion: increasing
Error: disccussed Suggestion: discussed
----------------
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
argument 4 -- not exactly. need to argue this:
Thus, if Stanley Park is ever to be as popular with our citizens as Carlton Park, the town will obviously need to provide more benches, thereby converting some of the unused open areas into spaces suitable for socializing.
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 526 350
No. of Characters: 2343 1500
No. of Different Words: 169 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.789 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.454 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.235 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 169 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 62 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 24 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.684 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.176 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.474 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.658 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.206 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 850, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ehind decrease in the number of visitors in the Stanley park. It is possible t...
^^
Line 3, column 288, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...rk is located in the heart of the city. It can be assumed that number of people re...
^^
Line 3, column 525, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Thus
...s it being nearby than the stanley park.Thus this assumption weakens the argument th...
^^^^
Line 3, column 525, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...s it being nearby than the stanley park.Thus this assumption weakens the argument th...
^^^^
Line 5, column 187, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...m the cameras mounted in the parking lot . It is necessary to assume that every vi...
^^
Line 7, column 288, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
... other facilities that the stanley park wouldnt have. This might also lead to a decreas...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, so, then, thus, while, in addition, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.6327345309 173% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 28.8173652695 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 74.0 55.5748502994 133% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2392.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 523.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.57361376673 5.12650576532 89% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.78217453174 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.28031954656 2.78398813304 82% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.323135755258 0.468620217663 69% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 740.7 705.55239521 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59920159681 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9817551669 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.894736842 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.5263157895 23.324526521 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.10526315789 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.422266611194 0.218282227539 193% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.205456322156 0.0743258471296 276% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109767294634 0.0701772020484 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.262318418776 0.128457276422 204% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.143036207944 0.0628817314937 227% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.99 48.3550499002 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.52 12.5979740519 76% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.94 8.32208582834 83% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 98.500998004 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.