In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favourite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.
The author of the given article assumes that if the Mason River is cleaned, its use for the purpose of water sports will definitely increase and hence suggests the local government to spend more money in their annual budget for developing such recreational facilities along the banks of river. His analysis is filled with unwarranted data and fallacious reasoning. The detailed explanation of the flaws in his argument will be done further in the ensuing paragraphs.
The first and foremost reason which renders the author' s argument baseless is that he has based his whole hypothesis on a survey conducted for a few residents of the Mason city. As he has not mentioned any information about the number of people involved in the same, there is a possibility that a major population of the city was excluded from the survey. There are various factors such as age, sex, financial conditions, health conditions, personal preferences, etc. that determine whether the river will be used for conducting water sports or not. Hence, it is quite illogical on the author's part to generalize the use of Mason River for water sports just by considering some erroneous data based on choices of some people of the city. If the author had given complete statistics about all the inhabitants of the city while conducting his research, then his conclusion would have been more valid.
Secondly, if the river has to be used for river sports it is necessary that the river is calm. If there is too much turbulence in the river, then using it for water sports like swimming and boating could be quite dangerous. The depth of the river should also be less to ensure no casualties happen with the participants of the events. Moreover, one should know about the dangerous aquatic animals living in the river. If the river is inhabited by reptiles such as snakes and crocodiles, then it will definitely be avoided by the people for the recreational activities. The author's argument would have been more convincing if he had mentioned about the flow of the water current of the river.
Lastly, the author believes that if the river is cleaned then it will be used for water sports more frequently by the natives of the Mason City. But, he does not consider the geographical location of the river. It is possible that the river may be flowing through the outskirts of the city, and hence people who live in the main city area might not be able to access it. Moreover, he also does not give detail of the publicly owned lands on the banks of river such as gardens, restaurants, etc. Thus, people might visit these places for their leisure time instead of using the river for the recreational activities. The author's reasoning would have been more logical if he had included the data about the surroundings and location of the river in his study.
Thus to conclude, the argument made by the author is completely unreasonable and lacks coherence and hence fails to convince the readers to use the Mason river for the water sports.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-10 | snowsss | 50 | view |
| 2019-08-08 | ruchavarade | 55 | view |
| 2019-08-04 | Asmita Pathak | 82 | view |
| 2019-06-10 | pallavipolas | 29 | view |
| 2018-09-12 | Aarohi Agarwal | 49 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 83
- The video camera provides such an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life that it has become a more important form of documentation than written records. 66
- The line graph below shows changes in the amount of fast food eaten by teenagers from Australia for 1975 to 2000. 67
- In June 1996, an experimental flu vaccine was trialled in a large country town on females only.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- Some people believe that exams are an inappropriate way of measuring students’ performance and should be replaced by continuous assessment. Do you agree or disagree with this view? 73
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly
----------------------
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 518 350
No. of Characters: 2442 1500
No. of Different Words: 228 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.771 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.714 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.54 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 148 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 112 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.9 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.497 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.85 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.387 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.562 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.166 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 49, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...t and foremost reason which renders the authors argument baseless is that he has based ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 574, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...le for the recreational activities. The authors argument would have been more convincin...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... location of the river in his study. Thus to conclude, the argument made by the a...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, lastly, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, thus, while, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2516.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 521.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82917466411 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77759609229 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59195410071 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.447216890595 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 801.0 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5885758971 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.363636364 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6818181818 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.86363636364 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.260062023074 0.218282227539 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0832141702266 0.0743258471296 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0603161388958 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162127295796 0.128457276422 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0325870018443 0.0628817314937 52% => 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: 11.03 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 98.500998004 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.