In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favourite 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.
The argument states that due to Government initiation for cleaning the Manson River, the residents in Manson City can utilize river for water sports and use of river will be increased. But this argument doesn't take into account some crucial facts regarding usage of water, such as how many of recent dwellers are willing to adopt water sports as recreational activities.
Firstly, the argument informs that during a survey Manson City residents voted for water sports as their favorite recreational activities but it doesn't disclose the time of survey. Because it may be the case when this survey was undertaken there were many willing dwellers but with flow of time they moved from the city and new residents have started to live in the city. Therefore if one wants to infer about the impending increase in use of river for water sports, one has to inquest current scenario.
Secondly, the argument also indicates that Manson River is rarely utilized for water sports. On the basis of this information, one can't conclude that if Government takes a sagacious decision regarding the drainage system and adornment of riverside will make people enthusiastic for pursuits of water sports - it is not logically acceptable. Here one may opposes that utilization of river water may be affected for quality and pungent smell of river - it can't be admissible as residents have complained about this in recent years only. So, Government's initiation doesn't lead to inflate water sports in river-water.
In conclusion, the argument does little to bolster the conclusion about increase in water sports. One has to properly investigate about the current interests of people and other influences on usage of river.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-10 | snowsss | 50 | view |
| 2019-08-08 | ruchavarade | 55 | view |
| 2019-08-04 | Asmita Pathak | 82 | view |
| 2019-06-10 | pallavipolas | 29 | view |
| 2018-09-12 | Aarohi Agarwal | 49 | view |
- The following appeared as part of an article in a business magazine."A recent study rating 300 male and female Mentian advertising executives according to the average number of hours they sleep per night showed an association between the amount of sleep t 50
- The following is a letter from the parent of a private school student to the principal of that school:Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meal 50
- "Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station's coverage of weather an 25
- Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and suppor 68
- Nowadays, food has become easier to prepare. Has this change improved the way people live?Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 90
Here one may opposes that
Here one may oppose that
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
flaws:
No. of Words: 280 350
Need one more argument.
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 11 15
No. of Words: 280 350
No. of Characters: 1402 1500
No. of Different Words: 145 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.091 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.007 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.623 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 100 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 74 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 57 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.455 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.958 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.818 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.443 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.641 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.108 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5