The conclusion drawn by the author that woven baskets with the mentioned distinctive pattern were not originated from Palea is weak and lacks substantial proof. A few arguments have been put forward by the author but there are several unwarranted assumptions and ambiguities in his argument. Taken as a whole, these unstated premises render the argument to be specious. Unless they are addressed with valid reasons, the entire argument falls apart.
The author has made the assumptions that Palea has been in the same state from the prehistoric eran until now. Yet the memo provides no substantiating evidence for this assumption. Perhaps, unrecorded events may have occurred and swept all establishment Paleans had made. Admittedly, at least one small piece could be found, 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 natural disaster or intertribal warfare vanished Palean baskets. Perhaps relatively stronger tribes resided in Lithos could have stolen all the baskets or extinguished them to cut off their root. Thus the author fails to address the existence of such possibilities which undermines his assumption.
Another assumption that the author fails to justify is that boats were the only transportation between Lithos and Palea. Perhaps boats might not have been the only transportation between them. Rather, land roads or bridges which happens to be gone now due to some geographical changes could have existed in the ancient period. The author overlooked the capability of building such means and of occurrence of some unexpected events that destroyed them making it as same as the current state. Unless there is sound proof that boats were the only choice able to connect those regions, the author’s assumption is weak to advocate.
The author also fails to consider the possibility of cultural contact between two regions. The trade of these unique baskets might have been exchanged for commercial and diplomatic uses. The fact that the baskets were found only in Lithos does not imply that Paleans were unable to make them. Further research in the range of not only Lithos and Palea but also other marginal states should be conducted to precisely examine the possibility that Paleans were also able to make those unique baskets. 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 author’s statement contains several assumptions that seriously undermine its validity. Unless they are backed by substantial proof, the entire argument falls apart.
- An ancient, traditional remedy for insomnia—the scent of lavender flowers—has now been proved effective. In a recent study, 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia slept each night for three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room where the 69
- It is more harmful to compromise one's own beliefs than to adhere to them. 83
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sur 34
- Argument Topic: "The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company. "According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced 29
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central 66
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- better to say: one sample is not big enough.
argument 2 -- better: people in Lithos may have boats. and the river was not deep at that time.
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
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: 23 15
No. of Words: 428 350
No. of Characters: 2205 1500
No. of Different Words: 221 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.548 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.152 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.659 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 152 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.609 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.33 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.304 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.295 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.5 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.108 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 677, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...xtinguished them to cut off their root. Thus the author fails to address the existen...
^^^^
Line 7, column 188, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ged for commercial and diplomatic uses. The fact that the baskets were found only i...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, may, so, thus, at least
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2273.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 428.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31074766355 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.548423998 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76751029652 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539719626168 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 704.7 705.55239521 100% => 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: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.504572511 57.8364921388 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.8260869565 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6086956522 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.30434782609 5.70786347227 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 8.20758483034 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24880725019 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.069213294177 0.0743258471296 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0653092473106 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127592811482 0.128457276422 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0686071455631 0.0628817314937 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.