My grade is 2.0. Keep learning English. Read some good books... Let me know if you need suggestions. Looks like you have a long way to go.
2.0. Does not present a critique based on logical analysis, but may instead present the writer's own views on the subject
The second paragraph contains the only attempt to analyse the argument.
Quote:
Perhaps there may be a case that the loss in circulation is beacause of poor quality of editing and not price.
The paper is trying to say that Mercury's circulation could have declined because of e.g. poor editing, not just because of the price. This demonstrates little understanding of the argument. The critique has to analyze the statement, namely, that "The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least until circulation increases to former levels." Is it the best way to get more people to read the Mercury? Yes or No? Why?
The rest of the paper is incoherent and has little substance. The paper fails to address even the most obvious issue: whether the start of the competing newspaper The Bugle affected the circulation of The Mercury.
Quote:
Thirdly,Author's premise in support of conclusion only helps us to know that cause of decrease in circulation of mercury's newspaper is the other newspaper
The Bugle .
Here the paper explicitly says that the cause of decrease of the circulation of The Mercury is The Bugle.
2.0. Does not develop ideas, or is disorganized and illogical
Quote:
Firstly, in the argument author considers price of newspaper to be the only factor affecting circulation.According to him mercury's circulation can be
increased by selling newspapers at lower rates . Though author's claim may have merit ,author fails to consider other factors regarding circulation.
Perhaps there may be a case that the loss in circulation is beacause of poor quality of editing and not price.
The second sentence discusses ways to increase The Mercury's circulation. The fourth sentence, however, discusses reasons for the decline in Mercury's circulation that has already happened. Are we talking about the past or about the future? The first sentence is incorrect: it is obviously wrong to say that price is the only factor affecting circulation, and the author of the argument has never made such a statement.
Quote:
Secondly,author assumes that increased circulation will attract more advertisers.As stated in the previous paragraph,author again does not considers all the
facts affecting circulation.There may be a case that increased circulation tends to decrease in requirement for advertising space as all the factors affecting
advertisements have not been considered.The author presents a poorly reasoned argument and based on the assumptions,we cannot accept his argument valid.
The first sentence demonstrates some ability to understand the argument. Then, however, the paper says "As stated in the previous paragraph, author again..." as if the previous paragraph has already analyzed the issue about advertising. The third sentence is incomprehensible. The part "...increased circulation tends to decrease" is particularly illogical.
The last two paragraphs are written so poorly that little meaning can be extracted.
Quote:
Thirdly,Author's premise in support of conclusion only helps us to know that cause of decrease in circulation of mercury's newspaper is the other newspaper
The Bugle . In no way does this premise helps us to fill the gap between assumptions and conclusion. We are still left lots of factor unconsidered.The
author's premise,the basis for his argument,lacks any legitimate evidentiary support and renders the conclusion unaccepted.
We do not know whether The Bugle is the cause of the decrease of The Mercury's circulation. This is definitely not a premise. However, even if it were a premise, what would it mean to say
In no way does this premise helps us to fill the gap between assumptions and conclusions. What is then the difference between a PREMISE and ASSUMPTIONS? Later it is said instead that "...premise... lacks any legitimate evidentiary support..."
In any case, the paper does not explain why it is important to know whether The Mercury's circulation has decreased because of The Bugle.
The last paragraph is just as incoherent. The errors in language and sentence structure constantly interfere with meaning; thus, no ideas or logic can be extracted.
2.0. The paper provides little, if any, relevant or reasonable support
There are no clear points of critique of the argument; so, naturally, there can be no support if there is virtually no critique.
2.0. Has serious and frequent problems in the use of language and in sentence structure
2.0. Contains numerous errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics that interfere with meaning
Consider, for example, this sentence:
Quote:
There may be a case that increased circulation tends to decrease in requirement for advertising space as all the factors affecting advertisements have not been considered.
Even though syntactically the sentence looks fine, all meaning has been lost. How can circulation decrease in requirement? What does it mean to say that "all the factors affecting advertisements have not been considered"?
Another one:
Quote:
The evidence in support of conclusion regarding the best way to increase circulation by decreasing price and regarding direct proportionality between circulation and requirement of advertising space remains ineffective .
"the best way to increase circulation by decreasing price" --- what is this?
"direct proportionality between circulation and requirement of advertising space" --- what is that?
How can evidence "remain ineffective"? What does it even mean?
In this sentence the (in)dependent clauses cannot be clearly identified. The structure is broken.
Quote:
The argument that [the best way to get more people to read the mercury is to reduce the price to below that of the bugle] is to increase circulation and this
increase will attract more advertisements is not entirely logically convincing because it ignores certain crucial assumptions.
The part in square brackets is a complete sentence that stands on its own. So we cannot say [CLAUSE] to do something. We certainly can say "The argument that [CLAUSE]. Thus we get a new composite subject: "The argument that [CLAUSE]". Fine. We can abbreviate it as "The ARGUMENT". So now we are left with
modified wrote:
The ARGUMENT is to increase circulation...
How can an argument increase circulation? Also note that modal verb to be that serves no purpose.
Perhaps, the sentence can be rewritten as
modified again wrote:
The argument that [the best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price to below that of The Bigle, and this best way will increase circulation, and this increased circulation will attract more advertisements] is not entirely logically convincing because it ignores certain crucial assumptions
There are also countless little errors:
Quote:
Firstly, in the argument author considers price of newspaper
THE author, THE price, A/THE newspaper
Quote:
According to him mercury's circulation
A comma is missing after "him".
[/quote]
Thirdly,Author's premise in support of conclusion only helps us to know that cause of decrease in circulation of mercury's newspaper is the other newspaper
The Bugle .
[/quote]
THE author's premise
in support of THE conclusion
"only helps us to know" --> only tells us
that cause --> that the cause
of decrease --> of the decrease
mercury's newspaper --> The Mercury
newspaper The Bugle --> newspaper, The Bugle (a comma is missing)
Quote:
renders the conclusion unaccepted.
Usage: "unaccepted" is not the right word here. Say instead "renders the conclusion invalid" or "renders the conclusion a belief rather than knowledge".
Quote:
Ultimately , the argument might have been strengthened
"might" is too weak; use could.
Quote:
by considering other factors prevailing in market such as printing quality ,editing ,sales technique,promotion, demand forecasting, management...
What does it mean - factors prevailing in market? Does editing prevail in the market? Does sales technique prevail in the market?
By the way, how is demand forecasting relevant? What kind of promotion are we talking about?
close
20 Jan 2013, 13:39
