conflicting views about the origin and the content of the manuscript
Recently, there has been a ton of debates as to explain the origin and the content of the manuscript written on vellum. Most specifically, in regarding to the reading passage, the writer puts forth the idea that there are several theories that explain the origin of the Voynich manuscript and its content. In the listening, the lecturer is quick to point out there are serious flaws in the writer’s claim. In fact, the professor believes the theories offer by the writer are probably null and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each point made in the reading.
First and foremost, the author in the article states that the manuscript is a genuine work on some scientific or magical subject written by the Ascham physician. Some professionals, in the same field, however, stand in firm opposition to this idea. In the listening, the lecturer believes Ascham was an ordinary scientist. He goes on to say that his books and his knowledge seem unlikely he was the author of such this scrip.
One group of scholars represented by the writer think that the manuscript is fake and he prepares it for sale to wealthy people. Of course, though, not all the experts in this field, believe this claim is accurate. Again, in the listening, the speaker points to this claim when he states this approach is so complicated and not easy to do. So, why he should spend so much time on it just for sale.
Finally, the writer wraps his argument by positing that maybe he wants to create a fake magic book for sale to antique book dealers. In the lecture, the professor takes issue with this point by contending that the book created 40000 years ago, and this claim is not possible.
To sum up, both the writer and speaker hold conflicting views about the origin and the content of the manuscript.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-01-19 | Elhamsarvari | 60 | view |
| 2021-01-19 | Elhamsarvari | 60 | view |
| 2019-03-19 | Raed Mudawar | 70 | view |
| 2019-03-18 | moath322 | 63 | view |
| 2019-03-16 | moath322 | 61 | view |
- tpo13 assay 3
- negative aspects of playing computer games between young children 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is better for children to choose jobs that are similar to their parents jobs than to choose jobs that are very different from their parents jobs 80
- debates about using a tactic called buzzing for advertisement 80
- telling the truth in relationships 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, regarding, so, as to, in fact, of course, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1489.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.7571884984 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5134248454 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517571884984 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 441.0 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 2.5761589404 388% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.8578728741 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.2666666667 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8666666667 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 7.06452816374 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.196730814087 0.272083759551 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0747488688842 0.0996497079465 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.153134467827 0.0662205650399 231% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16199025996 0.162205337803 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.218220127944 0.0443174109184 492% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.