The author in the argument concludes that customers who are served by margarine instead of butter do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term ‘butter’ to refer to either butter or margarine. The author’s conclusion based on the assumption that many customers do not complain when they are given or served margarine instead of butter in Happy Pancake restaurant. Moreover, according to the report of restaurant only about 2 percent of customers have complained on the change that brought by Happy Pancake House all over the southern united states. The authors argument does not sound convincing on the basis of assumption he included in the argument. The argument has several flaws in it.
Firstly, the author suggest here that only about 2 percent of customers have complained and hence concludes that an average of 98 of 100 people are enjoying and happy. Is it possible that customers who are not happy necessarily filed his or her complaint ? It may the case that customers who are not happy about the change that the restaurant brought have not filed their complaint to Happy Pancake House or they may be hesitant and unwilling towards file a complaint. Moreover, the author assumes that those who are not complained are happy. It may be a possibility that customers are only satisfactory about change and not enjoying the food.
Secondly, according to report obtained from servers of a restaurant customers have no issue when they asked for butter and get served by margarine. And hence, the author make his conclusion that customers either do not able to distinguish between butter and margarine or they use term butter to refer margarine. Were the fool? Were they boor or philistine ? A customer who regularly visits restaurant knows what is butter and margarine. It may a case that he was able to distinguish between butter and margarine but did not complain. In addition, he knew term butter and margarine and used specific word or term for what he wanted. The author here can make his conclusion more attractive and compelling by providing well sensed evidence.
Moreover, a report was submitted by the servers of Happy Pancake House. Could a report submitted by servers of a restaurant convincing or conducted in valid condition and characteristics or considering different circumstances on which the conclusion was made ? The author here can make argument well sounding by supplying the details about customers visited to restaurant and how many of them reviewed.
In sum, the argument has two major flaws on which its assumption is based. The author in the argument can make his conclusion by furnishing the details and data by the report submitted by servers of Happy pancake House, and also proving a well evidence that customers who does not complained about the change are happy and enjoying the food which had been served by servers of restaurant in United States.
- “Youth is wasted on the young”Agree or Disagree 73
- The following appeared in a recommendation from the planning department of the city of Transopolis."Ten years ago, as part of a comprehensive urban renewal program, the city of Transopolis adapted for industrial use a large area of severely substandard ho 66
- In this age of intensive media coverage, it is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for t 58
- Do you agree or disagree with a student must like a teacher in order to learn from the teacher 72
- "The birthrate in our city is declining: in fact, last year's birthrate was only one-half that of five years ago. Thus the number of students enrolled in our public schools will soon decrease dramatically, and we can safely reduce the funds budgeted for e 66
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 482 350
No. of Characters: 2378 1500
No. of Different Words: 173 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.686 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.934 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.685 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 172 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 73 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.957 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.782 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.329 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.525 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.164 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 585, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ll over the southern united states. The authors argument does not sound convincing on t...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 385, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rought have not filed their complaint to Happy Pancake House or they may be hesit...
^^
Line 5, column 44, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ondly, according to report obtained from servers of a restaurant customers have n...
^^
Line 9, column 86, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hich its assumption is based. The author in the argument can make his conclusion ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, well, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 11.1786427146 250% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2443.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 482.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06846473029 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68556276237 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82769504786 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.369294605809 0.468620217663 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 770.4 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.216886976 57.8364921388 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.217391304 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9565217391 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.70786347227 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251475137673 0.218282227539 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0762966453421 0.0743258471296 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0726167271895 0.0701772020484 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153208707472 0.128457276422 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.05596030643 0.0628817314937 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.09 8.32208582834 85% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => 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.