In this memo, the author argues that woven baskets with the mentioned distinctive pattern were not originated from Palea. To support this argument, the author points out that while only the ‘pattern’ was found in Palea, the actual ‘object’ were found in Lithos and since it is located across from Palea, it is more likely to be originated from there. The author also reasons that the most persuasive transportation between Lithos and Palea could be the boat but none are found. However, the argument is found to be specious in several respects.
To begin with, the argument relies on the assumption that there were no actual object, woven baskets, in Palea until now. Yet the memo provides no substantiating evidence for this assumption. Perhaps, the objects disappeared due to unrecorded events occurred in that ancient era. Admittedly, at least one small piece could be found in Palea if it was the origin, however, it is not sufficient to prove since none of empirical material recapitulating what happened in that era are found, it is reasonable to doubt that there might have been some unrecorded events that led to its disappearance: natural disasters that may have swept the village or being plundered attributed to intertribal warfare. Thus lacking reliable evidence of proving no actual baskets existed in Palea until all this time is difficult to accept the hasty conclusion that the baskets with the mentioned pattern were not from there.
Even if the argument relies on the assumption that since boats are not found, there would have been no cultural contact between two regions. Yet the memo provides no substantiating evidence for this assumption. Perhaps boats might not have been the only transportation between them. Rather, land roads or bridges which is gone now due to some geographical changes could have existed in the ancient period. Or perhaps, relatively stronger tribes resided in Lithos could have stolen all the baskets or extinguished them to cut off their root. Either of these scenarios, if true, would cast serious doubt on the author’s claim that the originator of the baskets were not from Palea.
In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide better evidence that there were no transportation between two regions except boats and historical proof that Palea didn’t had the baskets for real in that era. To better assess the argument we would need to know about whether there are historical records from marginal states describing Palea had made the baskets and lost them by some unexpected event and also any geological traces proving there were some cultural contact with Lithos.
- It is more harmful to compromise one's own beliefs than to adhere to them. 83
- The following appeared in a health magazine."The citizens of Forsythe have adopted more healthful lifestyles. Their responses to a recent survey show that in their eating habits they conform more closely to government nutritional recommendations than they 45
- Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than 58
- People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences. 83
- "A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college." - Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the posi 75
Essay evaluation report
see the comments here:
https://www.testbig.com/comment/101768#comment-101768
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 439 350
No. of Characters: 2175 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.577 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.954 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.577 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 146 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 111 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.389 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.063 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.342 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.507 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.106 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, thus, while, at least, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2263.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 438.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16666666667 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57476223824 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80860245371 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479452054795 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 702.0 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.2581517128 57.8364921388 156% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.722222222 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.83333333333 5.70786347227 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231126968674 0.218282227539 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.074851904679 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0581397449522 0.0701772020484 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148099871589 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0447200170937 0.0628817314937 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.