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 the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
While it may be true that the Manson city government ought his duty by providing more fund to riverside recreational facility, but the author statement to get more fund is rife with hole and assumption. This is not strong enough to lead increasing funding towards river clean up project.
As per author statement, the water sports is the favorite activity of residents. May be the report of survey is not valid or may be out of scope. For example If the survey could ask from the residents if would like to see the water sports or the hydro electric dam on the river, then most of the residents would attract towards water sports. Another example if the survey conducted in vacation time then people having more time in vacation days but when vacation would get over they goes to their normal routines. The sample may not be the representative of city residents, it may involve only people who resides upon the river. The survey may be 10 pages long but questions relevant about water sports may be one or two. We just do not know. Unless the survey is not representative, valid and reliable it cannot use effectively to support the author statement.
In addition author mentioned about the various complaints from residents about the quality of water and river's smell, but still here it doesn't clear that the complaints are from wide area of residents or two or three people are doing complaints multiple times. To strengthen author argument, it would be benefit from implementing a survey which include wide range of residents and ask from them why they are not using river.
Building upon implication that residents do not use river for swimming and boating, despite their professed interest, because the water is polluted and smelly, the author suggest the clean up of river will increase the usage of river. If the water quality and the smell is a problem due to extract of pollution of nearby factories or any other human activity then it would be remedied. But if the quality and aroma is the result of natural mineral deposit or surrounding rocks, it may not be true. for example there is some body of water which emit smells of sulfur due to geography of area. Consequently, a river clean up may not impact on river usage. Author may not able to make the connection between the water quality and usage of river.
At last I would like to conclude that a clean and beautiful river off course attract more people towards it and increase the tourism which would be beneficial to government as well as residents. For this reason city government may invest more money to improve the riverside recreational activities. However, author argument is not likely significant to persuade the city government to allocate more fund.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 86, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...the favorite activity of residents. May be the report of survey is not valid or ma...
^^
Line 3, column 484, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'go'
Suggestion: go
...s but when vacation would get over they goes to their normal routines. The sample ma...
^^^^
Line 5, column 4, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: addition,
... to support the author statement. In addition author mentioned about the various comp...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 137, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ter and rivers smell, but still here it doesnt clear that the complaints are from wide...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 499, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: For
... surrounding rocks, it may not be true. for example there is some body of water whi...
^^^
Line 7, column 520, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'somebody'?
Suggestion: somebody
...t may not be true. for example there is some body of water which emit smells of sulfur du...
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'consequently', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'in addition', 'as well as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.268774703557 0.229887763892 117% => OK
Verbs: 0.146245059289 0.158761421928 92% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0849802371542 0.0866891130778 98% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0533596837945 0.046263068375 115% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0316205533597 0.0685040099705 46% => OK
Prepositions: 0.120553359684 0.118717715034 102% => OK
Participles: 0.0197628458498 0.0351676179071 56% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.55656832088 2.67179642975 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0296442687747 0.0309702414327 96% => OK
Particles: 0.00395256916996 0.00188951952338 209% => OK
Determiners: 0.0849802371542 0.0887237588012 96% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0395256916996 0.0209618222197 189% => Less modal verbs wanted (like 'must , shall , will , should , would , can , could , may , and might').
WH_determiners: 0.0118577075099 0.0139019557991 85% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2736.0 2387.08602151 115% => OK
No of words: 471.0 408.028673835 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.80891719745 5.86048508987 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.48200974243 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.335456475584 0.338922669872 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.227176220807 0.251872472559 90% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.157112526539 0.174417080927 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.108280254777 0.112833075102 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55656832088 2.67179642975 96% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 212.727598566 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469214437367 0.524397521467 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 53.0807538786 59.2087087015 90% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6684587814 102% => OK
Sentence length: 22.4285714286 20.5533526081 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.4695159421 48.84282405 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.285714286 120.699889404 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4285714286 20.5533526081 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.619047619048 0.644075263715 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.5376344086 110% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.54480286738 108% => OK
Readability: 45.1461935093 45.7405998639 99% => OK
Elegance: 1.76923076923 1.45489161554 122% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.326356240517 0.300154397459 109% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.118009801539 0.103427244359 114% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.079158469901 0.0752933317313 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.559198371829 0.497263757937 112% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.167197712684 0.151897553556 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136162478275 0.114077575197 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.081940355713 0.0781384742642 105% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.321875843249 0.336927656856 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0380728789955 0.067059652881 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210655453381 0.210909579961 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0597411102309 0.0618886996521 97% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8870967742 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.86379928315 129% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.91756272401 142% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 8.42114695341 71% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 2.4623655914 162% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.75985663082 145% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 13.6433691756 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.