Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. But last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. A better alternative is to add a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, and so would reduce rush-hour traffic rather than fostering an increase."
In the argument, author concludes that adding bicycle lane would reduce rush-hour traffic in Blue highway. Author has represented various forms of premises to conclude main point. Author represents keen interests of resident’s people towards bicycle which will radically reduce highway traffics. He even illustrates previous year widening of highway accounts more severe traffic jams. Therefore, mentioned bicycle lane would only be best for maintaining traffics. Nevertheless, before the recommendation can be significantly evaluated, three questions must be answered.
Primarily, Green Highway and Blue highway are comparable in what basis? In other word, can these highway prospects same consistency in traffic jams? Is it possible that Green Highway and Blue Highway not similar on the basis of location-perhaps Green highway may be located in capital city where population is high which may results worsening of traffic jams even more after widening of roads, whereas Blue Highway can be located in non-residential area where widening the lane may result some fruitful result. If either of these scenarios has possibility to occur, the conclusion may fall apart.
Secondly, Does keen interest in bicycling reflects habituate adaptability in routine work? In other word, will people prefer to use bicycle to travel their office or work by bicycle in today’s busy schedule? Is it possible people regarding their hobby to be their day-to-day activities-perhaps people may enjoy their personal vehicles to travel which may be far convenient and accessible in use. If either of these scenarios has possibility to occur, traffic would be more crowded and problem would be not solved as author conclude so. Furthermore, this will probably weaken the statement presented by author.
Thirdly, Does last year issue still exists today? However, road structure, policies keeps on changing how it can be possibly repeats same incidence in today’s date too. Perhaps road may have facilitated with convenient traffic rules; road structure may beneficially reduce traffics jams. Furthermore, population of certain resident may have migrates to other cities. If the above is true, then argument does not hit the correct stone.
In synopsis, the article, as it provides some evidences, is considerably flawed due to its unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to provide some strong evidences to prop argument and able to answer above questions then bike lane in the Blue Highway proposal could be beneficial to reduce traffic jams.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-15 | p30kh40 | 63 | view |
| 2019-11-26 | Nithin Narla | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-16 | PRABINADHIKARI45 | 55 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | Yongrok_Jeong | 63 | view |
| 2019-11-02 | OliverRaab | 55 | view |
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with 55
- College students should be encouraged to pursue subjects that interest them rather than the courses that seem most likely to lead to jobs. 66
- Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. 73
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 389 350
No. of Characters: 2091 1500
No. of Different Words: 205 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.441 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.375 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.833 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 132 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.682 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.96 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.284 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.502 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.07 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ed, three questions must be answered. Primarily, Green Highway and Blue highwa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...occur, the conclusion may fall apart. Secondly, Does keen interest in bicyclin...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...en the statement presented by author. Thirdly, Does last year issue still exis...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, third, thirdly, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2164.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 389.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.56298200514 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44106776838 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95685252431 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54498714653 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 672.3 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 64.5069026994 57.8364921388 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.3636363636 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6818181818 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.68181818182 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19970264851 0.218282227539 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0584289265723 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0769319809793 0.0701772020484 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11366412135 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0641614106163 0.0628817314937 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.67 12.5979740519 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 98.500998004 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.