Peer response to Anna Tretyak's extended definition of the notion “Utopia”

by Victoria Boiko

The extended definition of “Utopia” is quite logically structured and adequate for reader's understanding.

The definition itself is organized in a single paragraph, avoiding indentions. The term is marked, hence the format of the paper is proper.
Beginning with the topic sentence, paragraph gives a general definition of the “Utopia”.

This sentence is quite clearly stated but somehow it lacks the controlling idea.

Following sentences support the main idea, providing additional information about the notion.

Supporting sentences in sufficient amount explain the term, indicating characteristic features of “Utopia”.

The attention should be drawn to the last supporting sentence. It was used to show a contrast to the very notion, probably, for better understanding of the term itself. But, this last supporting sentence is a confusing one, for it shows a dim returning to the main term “Utopia”.

After explaining the term, the author is not signalling the end of the paragraph with some phrase or word. Briefly, there is no concluding sentence,which is to summarize the main point of the paragraph and restate the topic sentence.

The sentences in the paragraph, especially supporting sentences, sometimes create a confusion and complicate reading.

Unfortunately, transitional signals are not used.

Moreover, ideological or narrative transition between the third and the fourth sentence lacks, it creates a disruption of sense.

Concerning grammar issue the paragraph is written correctly.

This extended definition was aimed to give all the necessary information for understanding the meaning of this term, but, somehow, it lacks fulfilling its main task.

Hence, there are some non-transparent moment in this extended definition to be improved =).