The argument here states that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. This argument fails to maintain several key factors on the basis of which it could be evaluated. To satisfy the conclusion, the authors’ reasons is that the archaeologist recently found that the “Palean” basket in Lithos village and there is a river between Lithos Village and Palea Village, due to the lack of evidence of the uses of a boat at that time no one could cross that big Brim river. However, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it provides little justification to arguers’’ conclusion. So, the statement is considered incomplete or unsubstantiated.
First of all, the argument readily assumes that some believe that particular distinctive pattern of so-called Palian woven basket has previously found only in Prehistoric Palean village and later he refuses that consideration. It is merely an assumption is made without solid ground. The argument does not provide the reliability of the authentic source of previous and recent standpoint. There can be a possibility that the previously believed statement is true. There is also a possibility that some archaeologist wants to raise some question to belie the historical fact and wants to attract funding from some relevant sources for further study. However, the argument would have been better if he provides the reliability of the source of information.
Second, the author states that the Brim River between the Palea village and the Lithos village is so deep and broad, and so-called Palean Basket cannot be transferred from one village to another village. This again is a weak analogy presented by an arguer. It does not demonstrate clear correlations between deep and broad river to exchange of Basket. It fails to explain the possibility of swimming as the best means of travel. There can be the possibility that the Palean was very good at swimming. It also fails to explain, how one can say there was no tendency of using a boat. The Palean boat could have been undiscovered due to a paucity of intense excursion.
Moreover, the pieces of evidence presented by an arguer are insufficient and raises some skeptical questions. For example, what is the reliability of the salutatory statement? Is there any lucrative buttressed group plays in-between the truth? Without convincing answers to these questions, the reader is left with the impression that it is more of wishful thinking rather than a substantive one.
- 10) Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the posi 50
- The following appeared in a memorandum to the planning department of an investment firm:"Costs have begun dropping for several types of equipment currently used to convert solar energy into electricity. Moreover, some exciting new technologies for convert 29
- Men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks. 50
- Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.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 sure 50
- In any given field, the leading voices come from people who are motivated not by conviction but by the desire to present opinions and ideas that differ from those held by the majority. 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, then, for example, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2110.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 403.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23573200993 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48049772903 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04177677727 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518610421836 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 668.7 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 63.7449884596 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.9090909091 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3181818182 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.81818181818 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 : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21297669077 0.218282227539 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0511642875866 0.0743258471296 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0729485119313 0.0701772020484 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111717312097 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0816041602144 0.0628817314937 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.