"Erosion of beach sand along the shores of Tria Island is a serious threat to our island and our tourist industry. In order to stop the erosion, we should charge people for using the beaches. Although this solution may annoy a few tourists in the short term, it will raise money for replenishing the sand. Replenishing the sand, as was done to protect buildings on the nearby island of Batia, will help protect buildings along our shores, thereby reducing these buildings' risk of additional damage from severe storms. And since beaches and buildings in the area will be preserved, Tria's tourist industry will improve over the long term."
The argument states that Tria's tourist industry will do well as long as they charge the tourists for using the beaches. The argument also claims that the charges collected will then be used to replensish the eroded sand of the beach, which would protect the surronding buildings from further damage. The argument in its current form seems fundamentally flawed, and hence, unconvincing. The support provided for the conclusion is weak and the argument makes too many unwarranted assumptions.
Just like all Islands, Tria Island may be famous for its beaches, hence attracting tourists. Erosion of the beach sand is no good news, however, the method implemented in order to replenish the sand doesn't seem beneficial. The argument claims that charging people entering the beach would make it easy to replensish the lost sand. This claim is not only a suspect, but also tenuous at its best because there seems to be no transparency. Would the funds really be utitlised for the beach sand replenishment? Taking the example of PM Funds Care, the funds were promised to be used for providing food and transportation to the under-priveledged section of India but instead was used to purchase Fighter Jets. So, coming back to Tria Island, there is no solid proof that the authorities would spend this collected money in fixing their beaches.
The argument is correct in the aspect of tourists getting annoyed by the charges on using the beach, because the charges would definitely not be a small amount. The argument fails to tell us how much fee would be charged from the people. It also fails to enlighten us about the classfication of charges: Residents and Tourists. Tourists are generally chagred higher than the former. Also, 'short term' is not concretely defined and if things go like this for longer time than expected, Tria Island may instead end up losing its tourists reather than imporving the tourist industry.
Naturally, Islands are prone to tornados, storms, typhoons and hurricanes and the replenishment of sand has no bearing of these natural calamities. The argument seems erroneous by mentioning that by replenishing the sand, Tria Island is protected from all these disasters. The argument has mentioned about the Island of Batia, which had also replenished their beach sand to protect its buidings, but does not mention whether it succeeded or not. Tria Island is wasting its time, and instead it should seek advanced solutions for safeguarding its buildings from natural calamities and storms.
Lastly, the presence and buildings doesn't seem to guarantee the tourist count going up. Tourists often go to Islands for a break from the normal and to feast their eyes with Carribean food and the beautiful beaches and huts. The sight of something modern and mundane ,such as buildings, in an Island would probably not please them.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-03 | Ifthekhar | 53 | view |
| 2023-01-02 | Kuldip851 | 58 | view |
| 2022-09-28 | Ruthvik_542 | 59 | view |
| 2022-09-25 | Vaishnavi Dixit | 67 | view |
| 2022-09-12 | Bolu | 75 | view |
- Erosion of beach sand along the shores of Tria Island is a serious threat to our island and our tourist industry In order to stop the erosion we should charge people for using the beaches Although this solution may annoy a few tourists in the short term i 69
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future 83
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student s field of study 79
Comments
Can the score provided by…
Can the score provided by the e-grader considered correct?
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 25, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The argument states that Trias tourist industry will do well as l...
^^
Line 1, column 303, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...rronding buildings from further damage. The argument in its current form seems fund...
^^^
Line 1, column 389, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ntally flawed, and hence, unconvincing. The support provided for the conclusion is ...
^^^
Line 2, column 200, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...lemented in order to replenish the sand doesnt seem beneficial. The argument claims th...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 36, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...s. Lastly, the presence and buildings doesnt seem to guarantee the tourist count goi...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 267, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...he sight of something modern and mundane ,such as buildings, in an Island would pr...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, lastly, may, really, so, then, well, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2379.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 467.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09421841542 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64867537961 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69249278529 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528907922912 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 688.5 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1314492622 57.8364921388 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.434782609 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3043478261 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5652173913 5.70786347227 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.311447323547 0.218282227539 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0896419698136 0.0743258471296 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0589932502831 0.0701772020484 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174942369395 0.128457276422 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0306078735376 0.0628817314937 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.