The lecturer disputes some arguments presented in the reading about the marketing strategies of different companies dubbed “buzzing”. She contends that the critics are misleading and unconvincing.
First, the reading claims that consumers should be cautious about the person that is been paid to promote a product as misleading information and guidance is provided. Conversely, the lecturer refutes by restating that it is a false accusation to out rightly say that buzzers do not say the truth. Even though, buzzers are being paid to advertise the company’s product, they genuine convey the necessary information.
Second, while the lecturer posits that it is true that people are more penchant to details given by buzzers, on the contrary, it is of advantage as plethora of question arises such as price of the product, longevity of the product to mention but a few. As a result, customers are knowledgeable and satisfied with product. This in direct contrast to reading which avers that consumers are less attentive to buzzers endorsements.
Finally, the lecturer argues that it is ridiculous to suggest that buzzing leads to unhealthy social relationship. He points out that while executing his work, there is a progressive customer relationship love, trust. However, the passage states that buzzing hinders the social relationship among customers.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, second, so, while, such as, as a result, it is true, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1166.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 211.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52606635071 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81127787577 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13560032502 2.5805825403 122% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.611374407583 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 353.7 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.2366301444 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1818181818 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3636363636 7.06452816374 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.276168880946 0.272083759551 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0908312750596 0.0996497079465 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.067901552794 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138922814886 0.162205337803 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0866229025304 0.0443174109184 195% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 53.8541721854 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 12.2367328918 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.82 8.42419426049 117% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.