Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive design pattern have
previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric
village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the
Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a
“Palean” basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from
Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans
could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found.
Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean
The facts presented in the argument states that in the prehistoric times, Palean baskets had a distinguished design pattern and were made by the people residing in the village of Palea. However, this belief no longer holds true as archaelogists have found a Paleon basket in Lithos, a village across the Brim river from Palea.
The author is making the readers believe that these baskets were also used by the people of Lithos and it could be possible that they have made it. This is a premature assumption as the fact is being put out by taking only one basket into the consmideration. One of the alternative options is to carry more research in the village of Palea and nearby areas to prove this fact. Also, the author mentions about only one way to reach the Lithos through the Brim river. There could be other ways to reach the village of Lithos which should be discovered.
The author assumes that the origin of the baskets is not uniquely Paleon. This statement contradicts words as no Paleon boats were found in the Brim river which weakens the argument significantly. There seems be not enough evidences which could prove that the origin of the baskets is not only Palea.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to offer more evidence (perhaps in the form of a systematic research study) then it will be possible to fully evaluate that the baskets are not uniquely Paleon and they were made by people of nearby areas.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 268 350
No. of Characters: 1244 1500
No. of Different Words: 130 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.046 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.642 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.484 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 84 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 51 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 32 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 18 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.728 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.417 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.386 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.616 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.048 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 95, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... prehistoric times, Palean baskets had a distinguished design pattern and were ma...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, then, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1277.0 2260.96107784 56% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 268.0 441.139720559 61% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.76492537313 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 4.56307096286 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55599738519 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 204.123752495 66% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 406.8 705.55239521 58% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.7658818761 57.8364921388 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.416666667 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3333333333 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.08333333333 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.232268083169 0.218282227539 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0872735499293 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0695525002206 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147203597244 0.128457276422 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0797055150551 0.0628817314937 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 12.5979740519 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.79 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 98.500998004 53% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.