Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive 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 archaeol

Essay topics:

Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive 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.

This topic deals with arguing about the originality of the baskets of Pales woven ina particular distinctive pattern. The recent archaelogical study discovers similar baskets in an ancient village 'Lithos' accross the Brim River from Palea. The argument avers that as the Brim River is very deep and broad the only way to cross the river would have been boats but no Palean boats have been found. Therefore, it is asserted that Palean baskets are banal. However, the prediction is contignent upon several questions that must be answered to properly evaluate the validity of the argument.

First, only the present coarse of the river cannot be used as a proof. It is important to consider the fact that coarse of the river changes with time. Various factors contribute to this cause. Weathering of coast with time causes the river to broaden and widen. Similarly a flood could have been one of the reasons for deeper waters. A deeper comprehension of the georaphical study of river is required.
In furtherance, alone the absence of boat cannot determine the relationship between two villages. Other means of water transport is viable, rope, hanging, or just normal bridges. Ancient times, due to unavailability of heavy machinery, metal boats were impractical. And there are a higher chances of wooden boats degrading over years which may also lead to absence of boats. Historical research on the common mode of transport in the area is necessary.
In conclusion, despite a broad and deep river, River Brim between the two villages Lithos and Palean, the prediction based on the assumptions given is rife with unwarranted assumptions and open to questions stated above that must be answered satisfactorily to prove the plausibility of such presentments.

Votes
Average: 7 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2023-08-09 M1randa 55 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user Rahasya Barkur :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 264, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Similarly,
... causes the river to broaden and widen. Similarly a flood could have been one of the reas...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 16, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y of river is required. In furtherance, alone the absence of boat cannot determi...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, similarly, so, therefore, in conclusion

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 28.8173652695 31% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1471.0 2260.96107784 65% => OK
No of words: 286.0 441.139720559 65% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14335664336 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79184145292 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.587412587413 0.468620217663 125% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 705.55239521 66% => 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: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 57.9507606287 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.5294117647 119.503703932 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8235294118 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.41176470588 5.70786347227 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.180349125218 0.218282227539 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472256947417 0.0743258471296 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0667210781461 0.0701772020484 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0970025668413 0.128457276422 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105337382302 0.0628817314937 168% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 14.3799401198 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 10 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 286 350
No. of Characters: 1434 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.112 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.014 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.707 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 94 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 74 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 48 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.824 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.256 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.412 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.29 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.364 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.05 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 2 5