If the paper from every morning edition of the nation’s largest newspaper were collected and rendered into paper pulp that the newspaper could reuse, about 5 million trees would be saved each year. This kind of recycling is unnecessary, however, since the newspaper maintains its own forests to ensure an uninterrupted supply of paper
The author of the argument has concluded that since trends show that coffee is being consumed at a higher rate than cola, the investors should move their investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Company. To provide support to his conclusion the author refers to a survey about which we are given very little information with respect to whom the source and the participants were. While the author's argument has some merit, it contains a number of questionable assumptions and leaves out a number of important issues that need to be addressed in order to substantiate the argument.
Most conspicuously, the author refers to "studies" in order to prove his claims about the trends in consumption of coffee and cola products respectively. But the author does not address the issues such as who the sources of these studies are nor who were the people who were surveyed. The author also does not give any information about the total number of respondents in these studies or what alll questions were asked in them. Consider, for instance, if the survey was done by a PR firm hired by a coffee making company, then the argument would be weakened. Thus, the author should clearly provide us with appropriate materials describing the nature, source and content of these surveys. Without doing so, the author leaves the door too far wide open for any objective individual to make his or her own conclusion about the author's claim. Since these studies form the basis of author's whole argument, he or she needs to clear all doubts regarding its authenticity by providing complete details about them.
Additionally, the author seems to make a correlation between the indications of the survey and investing in Cola Loca or Early Bird Coffee Company. But this is a clear case of making false cause fallacy, without providing any substantial evidence to prove the claim. The author has left too many questions unanswered. For example, is the financial status of these two companies comparable? What is the respective size of these two companies? Is the author adovacating for making a medium term or a long term investment? What will happen to the share prices in the short term? Without, decisive answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more wishful thinking than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the author's argument is neither compelling nor persuasive. Because the argument omits several key concerns, it is poorly supported. If the author had backed up his or her points with conclusive evidence and included the items discussed above, the argument would have been more thorough and thus convincing.
- The diagrams below give information on transport and car use in Edmonton.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.Write at least 150 words. 78
- The table below shows the sales made by a coffee shop in an office building on a typical weekday. 73
- The diagram illustrates the process that is used to manufacture bricks for the building industry. 61
- The two maps below show an island, before and after the construction of some tourist facilities.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 89
- The graph below shows the population figures of different types of turtles in India between 1980 and 2012 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 59
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 390, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ce and the participants were. While the authors argument has some merit, it contains a ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...tantive evidence. In conclusion, the authors argument is neither compelling nor pers...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, regarding, so, then, thus, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2215.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 438.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05707762557 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57476223824 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79701984068 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53196347032 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 686.7 705.55239521 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.9472972195 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.476190476 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8571428571 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.47619047619 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0603091258367 0.218282227539 28% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0183799527626 0.0743258471296 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0201894926391 0.0701772020484 29% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0373592304203 0.128457276422 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0274547353845 0.0628817314937 44% => 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: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => 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: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.