In this argument, the author rebuts the general notion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palean. To support this refutation, the author points out that a “Palean” basket was recently discovered by researchers in Lithos that was an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The author also reasons that Brim River’s width and depth and the lack of proper vehicles to cross over the river during the Palean’s time would have prevented the so-called Palean baskets from being brought over the river from Palean to Lithos; thus the basket was also made in Lthos too in the prehistoric times. Careful scrutiny reveals that the evidence given by the author provides little credible support to the author’s claim in several respects.
Basically, the author hastily assumes that the recent discovery of the basket in Lithos means only two possibilities that the basket was carried by Palean or it was made by in Lothos in the prehistoric times. It might be the case, however, it is still possible that it was brought from Palean to Lithos in another times after the prehistoric times. For instance, several hundred years ago, a person who had collected artifact took the basket from Palean to Lithos or a skill to make a basket similar to Palean’s one was developed in Lithos and the Lithos people made it later. If these possibilities are true, this argument cannot convince us.
Secondly, even we concede that bring the basket from Palean to Lithos occurred only the prehistoric times, this argument is problematic in that it assures that the basket was only moved by human. In this regard, however, there are several possible other reasons to explain the discovery in Lithos. If in the prehistoric times, there was tremendously large flood in Palean and Lithos, this disaster made it possible that the flood moved the basket from Palean to another areas, such as Lithos. Until the author eliminate this possibility, this argument is still controversial.
Lastly, stating no Palean boats have been found, the author also relies on another assumption that the absence of Palean boat prohibit the people from crossing over the river. In this regard, however, there are several other ways to move from Palean to Lithos. For instance, the Palean people in the prehistoric times were able to go to Lithos by land or there were specialists who could cross over the deep and broad river. Without ruling out these possibilities, we cannot evaluate this argument properly.
- TPO-26 - Integrated Writing Task The zebra mussel, a freshwater shellfish native to Eastern Europe, has long been spreading out from its original habitats and has now reached parts of North America. There are reasons to believe that this invasion cannot b 83
- Essay topics: Populations of the yellow cedar, a species of tree that is common in northwestern North America, have been steadily declining for more than a century now, since about 1880. Scientists have advanced several hypotheses to explain this decline. 73
- Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall stu 79
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? people who cannot accept the criticism from others will not be successful in working in a group. 70
- 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, archa 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 172, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... refutation, the author points out that a 'Palean' basket was recently ...
^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'however', 'if', 'lastly', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'still', 'thus', 'for instance', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.252083333333 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.1375 0.15541462614 88% => OK
Adjectives: 0.08125 0.0836205057962 97% => OK
Adverbs: 0.05625 0.0520304965353 108% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0208333333333 0.0272364105082 76% => OK
Prepositions: 0.127083333333 0.125424944231 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0395833333333 0.0416121511921 95% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.62425514925 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0333333333333 0.026700313972 125% => OK
Particles: 0.00416666666667 0.001811407834 230% => OK
Determiners: 0.129166666667 0.113004496875 114% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0104166666667 0.0255425247493 41% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00625 0.0127820249294 49% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2519.0 2731.13054187 92% => OK
No of words: 417.0 446.07635468 93% => OK
Chars per words: 6.04076738609 6.12365571057 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5189133491 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.402877697842 0.378187486979 107% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.237410071942 0.287650121315 83% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.141486810552 0.208842608468 68% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0863309352518 0.135150697306 64% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62425514925 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 207.018472906 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.438848920863 0.469332199767 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 47.1461618006 52.1807786196 90% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.039408867 80% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0625 23.2022227129 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.405830881 57.7814097925 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 157.4375 141.986410481 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0625 23.2022227129 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.75 0.724660767414 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 49.8035071942 51.9672348444 96% => OK
Elegance: 1.95145631068 1.8405768891 106% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.401952349354 0.441005458295 91% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.146003357138 0.135418324435 108% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.10143896252 0.0829849096947 122% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.601762197486 0.58762219726 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.20462011211 0.147661913831 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.181706261036 0.193483328276 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101999741789 0.0970749176394 105% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.599120859104 0.42659136922 140% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0726303633974 0.0774707102158 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.312322537169 0.312017818177 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0424076715934 0.0698173142475 61% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.33743842365 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.82512315271 124% => OK
Positive topic words: 2.0 6.46551724138 31% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.82389162562 212% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 14.657635468 109% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.