Analysing Text

Running head: ANALYSING TEXT
ANALYSING TEXT
Name of the student:
Name of University:
Author Note:

1ANALYSING TEXT
This essay has discussed the grammatical, morphological and lexeme errors made in
the given text. Here the writer has used ample of exaggerative words which do not really
have any implication in the meaning of the sentence. The pattern of writing is quite satisfying
because the writer has introduced different information for this particular argument.
However, in this text there has been a lot of mistake in the sentence structures. There are
some morphological mistakes where the writer has not used proper form of a lexeme with
proper prefix or suffix. In most of the cases the writer has used compound sentence with
different types of linkers but not all of those conjunctions have appropriateness in their usage.
Present tense is the most observed tense in this text but the writer has used incorrect voice
often. The use of words by the writer captures his weak vocabulary hence he has used same
words a twice in one sentence.
From the beginning of the paragraph the writer has used present tense. The entire
piece is dominated by the excessive use of present tense which is often incorrect (Rochemont,
2014). In the first line, the writer has talked about nuclear power which is in singular form.
The word nuclear power is a proper noun but at the end the writer has made use of common
noun ‘sources’ which needed to be in singular. On the other hand, if the writer wanted to
demonstrate that the nuclear power is an example of cheap energy source, he must have used
different verb instead of ‘provides’ because this particular verb does not have any connection
with amplification of a noun.
In the second line, the use of word, ‘sometimes’ is inappropriate as it is not matching
the real phenomena of energy misbalance on the earth. Instead of sometimes, the writer may
have used ‘in the near future; or ‘one day’ to denote the intensity of the situation. The
vocabulary of the writer seems to be poor or he does not have much knowledge about the
difference between the natural components of energy or the sources of energy. This writer
has termed oil and gas to be the sources of energy but these actually are components of

2ANALYSING TEXT
energy production. In academic writing, the writers are not allowed to use etc. because it is
not an acceptable word while writing an argumentative text. Instead of using etc. the writer
would have used “and so forth” or “and others of the same kind.”
In the topic sentence where the writer has stated that he will be discussing the
arguments to support nuclear power, he has missed a very essential preposition. After the
word favour, there has to be a preposition ‘of’ without which the sentence has no meaning. In
the next line the writer has used a passive voice where the structure is completely different
from what he has written. Grammatically, in a passive voice, the subject is followed by a ‘be
or an auxiliary verb’ such as ‘am or is or are’ in present which can be changed according to
the required change (Sweet, 2014). Here the subject is the nuclear energy and the tense is
used in present. This is the reason why the phrase ‘nuclear energy’ should be followed by
verb ‘is’. After the auxiliary verb, there has to be a verb in its past participle form. According
to this rule, the word ‘provides’ will be ‘provided’. Finally, the conjunction by should be
replaced with, ‘with’ as chemical materials are non-living agents (Frodesen, 2018).
In the next sentence the writer has used a comparative degree but the sentence seems
to be incomplete. The writer in this sentence has perfectly used the degree with proper
preposition than but has missed out the word ‘sources’ at the end. In the following sentence,
there is a need of punctuation after the word ‘power’. There must be a comma as this portion
has served as a phrase. The complete sentence is full of syntax errors as well as grammatical
mistakes. The word ‘it’ is a singular subject which needs a singular verb which means the
verb right after ‘it’ needs to carry ‘-s or -es’ (Burns & Borg, 2015). Therefore, the verb
‘involve’ should carry an ‘s’ with it. The subject ‘it’, itself is confusing in this sentence
because it is not clear whether the writer has tried to denote nuclear energy or other sources
through ‘it’. The phrase ‘some expert people’ is an example of pleonasm where the writer has
used too many words to express one response. In the same sentence, the writer has used the