The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager.
"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."
In the above statement, the author argues that adjusting the amount of water usage from the showerheads will save a considerable amount of cost and profits will be increased. While supporting the argument, the author relies on numerous assumptions that cannot be taken for granted. Thus, the argument remains largely unconvincing without further evidence to verify unjustified assumptions.
Firstly, the author assumes that what seemed to be successful in floors 1 to 5 will be successful to the same degree in floors other than 1 through 5. The author is assuming that the similar proportion of people lives in the building. However, it may not be the case. There could be almost no body living in the floors 1 to 5, that restricting the amount of water usage from the shower heads would not result in complaints. Residents proportion could be lopsided to upper floors that when the restriction is applied to all floors, substantial number of complaints could be followed. Therefore, additional evidence pertaining to the proportion of the residents inside the Sunnyside building is needed to support the claim and assess it.
Secondly, what had been done a month ago to be resulting in the same effect currently is not conclusively proven. The result that the author propounds to support for his evidence was from a month ago. However, the weather could have changed for the residents to require a lot of high pressured water from the showerheads for sanity. It suddenly could have changed to a hot summer day. Therefore, the residents in the building will protest toward the manager of the building and the managers could spend a lot of financial spending to placate the residents' complaints. Then, it will not guarantee the profits to increase. As such, more detailed evidence on whether the overall environment surrounding the place stays the same should be warranted in order to assess the author's claim.
Lastly, the author assumes that the residents will not take additional action when their water readings are in constraint. However, it is not plausible without corroborating evidence. Due to the limitation of water readings, the residents are deprived of their opportunity to be clean. Therefore, in order to prevent the actions that could make themselves out of sanity, they will try to prevent sweating. If residents follow this context, they will turn on the air conditioner alternatively. Then, the costs for managing the building might even exceed the costs for the water usage, and profits might be smaller than the casual water usage without the constraint. Thus, it is necessary to consider evidence about whether the residents will take additional action in place of limitation of water to claim the writer's statement conclusively.
In sum, the author's claim is not fully supportive in its current form. Further evidence on proportion of the residents inside the building, surrounding environment, such as climate, and alternative action taken by the residents when confronted with the shortage of water is crucial in determining the validity of the author's assertion.
- The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people. 29
- 61. People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences. 39
- 1. Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, ar 61
- In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County last year lowered its speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour on all county highways. But this effort has failed: the number of accidents has not decreased, and, based on reports by the highway patro 57
- The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager."One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of i 66
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- you made a condition which is good for your arguments: 'no body living in the floors 1 to 5'.
argument 2 -- we can't make some stories. we may say: maybe more complains after one month.
argument 3 -- wrong: 'Therefore, in order to prevent the actions that could make themselves out of sanity, they will try to prevent sweating.'. we can only make arguments from the prompts.
----------------
Let's analyze the structure of the statement and argue accordingly:
condition 1:
One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. //maybe people use water in a longer time, so it won't save
condition 2:
Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. //1. it doesn't grantee a considerable savings. 2. the time is short: 'One month ago,' maybe more complains come later.
conclusion:
Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further. //your argument 1 but the example is extremely. here we need to compare the money saved from water usage to the money loss: for example, some people move out of the building because of the showers. and it takes money to change the shower heads which is still a cost
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 501 350
No. of Characters: 2538 1500
No. of Different Words: 214 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.731 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.066 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.776 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 195 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 149 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 72 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.04 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.097 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.64 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.286 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.469 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.05 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 291, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'nobody'?
Suggestion: nobody
... not be the case. There could be almost no body living in the floors 1 to 5, that restr...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 810, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ace of limitation of water to claim the writers statement conclusively. In sum, the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 72, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Further,
...t fully supportive in its current form. Further evidence on proportion of the residents...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 318, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...cial in determining the validity of the authors assertion.
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'firstly', 'however', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'then', 'therefore', 'thus', 'while', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.236889692586 0.25644967241 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.153707052441 0.15541462614 99% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0669077757685 0.0836205057962 80% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0596745027125 0.0520304965353 115% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0235081374322 0.0272364105082 86% => OK
Prepositions: 0.126582278481 0.125424944231 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0488245931284 0.0416121511921 117% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.84924808826 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0397830018083 0.026700313972 149% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.122965641953 0.113004496875 109% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0397830018083 0.0255425247493 156% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0162748643761 0.0127820249294 127% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3101.0 2731.13054187 114% => OK
No of words: 501.0 446.07635468 112% => OK
Chars per words: 6.18962075848 6.12365571057 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73107062784 4.57801047555 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.395209580838 0.378187486979 105% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.307385229541 0.287650121315 107% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.223552894212 0.208842608468 107% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.161676646707 0.135150697306 120% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84924808826 2.79052419416 102% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 207.018472906 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453093812375 0.469332199767 97% => OK
Word variations: 51.8631158311 52.1807786196 99% => OK
How many sentences: 25.0 20.039408867 125% => OK
Sentence length: 20.04 23.2022227129 86% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.9007668537 57.7814097925 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.04 141.986410481 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.04 23.2022227129 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.52 0.724660767414 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 50.7785229541 51.9672348444 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.74045801527 1.8405768891 95% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.609730787245 0.441005458295 138% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.113417102574 0.135418324435 84% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0644530025814 0.0829849096947 78% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.565415431112 0.58762219726 96% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.166045151029 0.147661913831 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.271781304936 0.193483328276 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.126713323919 0.0970749176394 131% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.593560966098 0.42659136922 139% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0843103650502 0.0774707102158 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.473548582174 0.312017818177 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0593412965087 0.0698173142475 85% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.33743842365 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.87684729064 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.82512315271 166% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 5.36822660099 168% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.82389162562 212% => OK
Total topic words: 22.0 14.657635468 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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: This is not the final score. 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.