Amtrak intercity train service
The reading and the passage are about the effectiveness of selling the Amtrak intercity service to private companies. Actually, the writer provides three drawbacks of governmental support for this train service. However, the professor is not convinced of this and casts doubt on each of supports presented in the passage. Having categorically rejected the drawbacks, she is of the opinion that the train service should continue running by the government.
To begin with, both the writer and the speaker put forth to the idea of the costs. In this vein, the writer disputes that Amtrak offers service to even far and less accessible parts of the country with a few population. Therefore, this limited passengers' ticket money cannot afford the maintenance costs. This specific notion is challenged by the professor. In fact, the lecturer is of the opinion that the Amtrak's purpose is not to provide benefits for the government, but it has aimed to provide needed transportation mean for all the citizens. Moreover, she averts that citizens who live in further areas have the equal right to enjoy fine transportation service as much as people living in the more accessible areas.
Secondly, the writer discusses that government have to support other transportation services such as airlines owing to the fact that its exclusive support for Amtrak has weaken other services to compete with this train service due to the cheaper ticket price that it offers. On the other hand, the professor opposes this idea by asserting that the government do support airlines in different sections such as building air traffic control towers, supporting the officers, and maintaining weather satellites.
Finally, the article and the speech talks about the train's popularity. According to the article this transportation service is not very popular and most of the people prefer to use their own car for their expeditions. Contrastly, the lecturer's stance is that less people use this train because the train is out dated. She provides the example of European and Japanese train to illustrate that if the government invests money to improve the service people will be interested to use the affordable and fast trains instead of their cars.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 204, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun population seems to be countable; consider using: 'few populations'.
Suggestion: few populations
... accessible parts of the country with a few population. Therefore, this limited passengers tic...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 171, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'weakened'.
Suggestion: weakened
...at its exclusive support for Amtrak has weaken other services to compete with this tra...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 53, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'trains'' or 'train's'?
Suggestion: trains'; train's
... article and the speech talks about the trains popularity. According to the article t...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 236, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
... for their expeditions. Contrastly, the lecturers stance is that less people use this tra...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 261, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ontrastly, the lecturers stance is that less people use this train because the train...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, in fact, such as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 15.1003584229 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 9.8082437276 31% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 13.8261648746 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 43.0788530466 65% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 52.1666666667 84% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.0752688172 136% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1865.0 1977.66487455 94% => OK
No of words: 359.0 407.700716846 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19498607242 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35284910392 4.48103885553 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76900398877 2.67179642975 104% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 212.727598566 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.520891364903 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 573.3 618.680645161 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 9.0 3.08781362007 291% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => 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: 22.0 20.1344086022 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.2146581711 48.9658058833 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.5625 100.406767564 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4375 20.6045352989 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.125 5.45110844103 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.334027241377 0.236089414692 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101928226162 0.076458572812 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.097980869766 0.0737576698707 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204484243409 0.150856017488 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0695332045578 0.0645574589148 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 11.7677419355 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 58.1214874552 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.1575268817 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 10.9000537634 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 86.8835125448 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.0537634409 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.