This document is part of a study, conducted by Ed Vavra, of the syntax of students' writing.
| Student's Text: | Comments: |
| \-\There
was a complient {of
sexual harassment} {by
two women,} working
{for the city
planning commission.}
\-\The two women are suing their supervisor {for sexual harassment.} \-\Their supervisor, a male, reprimanded the two women {about the length} {of their skirts.} \-\He stated [that the skirt length, [which was 3 inches {above the knee,}] was to distracting.] \-\The supervisor could have come and confronted the women {about their dress length} and stated [that it was not apripated {for the work place.}] \-\{At the interview,} the supervisor may have never stated {about [how long the women's dress length had to be.]} \-\He could of warned them and [if that didnt work,] then took other forms {of action.} \-\[Even though the women were not informed {upon hiring} {about the length} {of the skirt,}] they should have know. \-\{In working} {in an office,} {like a city planning commission,} you should wear bussiness clothes. \-\Wearing a dress 3 inches {above the knee} is not acceptable {in the office.} \-\Working {in the city planning commision} is a government job \-\and you should look bussiness like. \-\The supervisor could have avoided the complient. \-\He could of suggested [what was acceptable] and [what was not] {at the interview.} \-\Maybe he could of took notice {to [what they were wearing {on the interview.}]} \F\To Estalish [if they would be right {for the job.}] |
[sic]
[sic]
[sic] [sic]
[sic][sic] [sic] See Fragments. |
Raw Data |
Calculated Data |
| Number
of words = 224 Number of paragraphs = 5 # of Prepositional Phrases = 25 # of Sub Clauses Level
1 = 9 # of Sub Clauses Level 2 = 1 # of Sub Clauses Level 3 = 0 # of Sub Clauses Level 4= 0 # of Fragments = 1 # of S/V Agr Errors = 0 |
Words
per main clause = 14.0 Prep Phrases / Main Clause = 1.56 % of words in P Phrases = 40 Total Sub Clauses / Main Cl = .63 Sub Clauses Level 2+ / MC = .06
Words per paragraph = 44.8 |
Unanalyzed Text:
There was a complient of sexual
harassment by two women, working for the city planning commission.
The two women are suing their supervisor
for sexual harassment. Their supervisor, a male, reprimanded the two women
about the length of their skirts. He stated that the skirt length, which
was 3 inches above the knee, was to distracting.
The supervisor could have come and
confronted the women about their dress length and stated that it was not
apripated for the work place. At the interview, the supervisor may have
never stated about how long the women's dress length had to be. He could
of warned them and if that didnt work, then took other forms of action.
Even though the women were not informed
upon hiring about the length of the skirt, they should have know. In working
in an office, like a city planning commission, you should wear bussiness
clothes. Wearing a dress 3 inches above the knee is not acceptable in the
office. Working in the city planning commision is a government job and
you should look bussiness like.
The supervisor could have avoided the
complient. He could of suggested what was acceptable and what was not at
the interview. Maybe he could of took notice to what they were wearing
on the interview. To Estalish if they would be right for the job.