An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p

The argument takes the stance that the government has to do everything in its capacity to promote the new type of millet based on many assumptions that may either strength or weaken the claim.

Firstly, digging on the feasibility of the new breed in the nation of Tagus, the author assumes that the farmers are educated enough about the new breed of millets and are aware of the requirements to grow the crop. We are aware that many different varieties of the same crop or plant is grown and taken care of differently. For example, the different breeds of mangoes have different seasons which they grow, soil nutrient conditions and water availability. It is important to consider all these factors for the new breed of millets to be promoted. If majority of these factors are favorable to the new breed, a smooth transition into growing and harvesting it can be possible.

Furthermore, the passage suggests that people will be ready to adapt to the new variety based quite a few assumptions. As mentioned previously in the case of mangoes, different breeds of mangoes have different tastes and textures. The author of the argument assumes that the new variety would be an exact mirror image in terms of characteristics of the exisiting breed of millets in Tagus. It is also important to understand how the millets are used in preperation of their daily food and if the new variety can integrate well within the existing food they consume. For instance, it might be that the existing millets are porous and they make a batter out of them to consume but the new variety lacks the characteristic and can not be consumed. This would reduce the possibility of people of Tagus adapting to the new variety due to a required change in their food preparation requirements.

In addition to the above assumptions, an important assumption the author of the argument makes is regarding the price and profitability of the new variety of millets. Even with a subsidy in the price, would the new breed secure the farmers atleast as much profits to the farmers as the existing variety? It is very less likely that a farmer would take a cut in their profits and grow the new variety of millets. It is also important to question the financial status of the government of the impoverished nation of Tagus. Subsidies on the new variety would mean massive amounts of financial liability which is over an above the existing requirements of the nation. Is the government willing to take the step? If so, for how long of a duration would be subsidy be provided to the farmers?

These are all important questions that need to be answered and will either strengthen or weaken the argument made by the author about the government taking all possible actions to promote the new variety.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 235, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...nts to grow the crop. We are aware that many different varieties of the same crop or plant is ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 252, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...new breed secure the farmers atleast as much profits to the farmers as the existing ...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, regarding, so, then, well, as to, for example, for instance, in addition

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 55.5748502994 128% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2294.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 477.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80922431866 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67336384929 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74301013845 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.433962264151 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 732.6 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.6237903054 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.7 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.85 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.297166666343 0.218282227539 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103705506408 0.0743258471296 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0597863923487 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162439995251 0.128457276422 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0635201271057 0.0628817314937 101% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.

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: 20 15
No. of Words: 477 350
No. of Characters: 2247 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.673 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.711 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.674 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 156 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 125 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.85 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.418 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.356 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.533 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.107 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5