The author of the article and the lecturer both discuss who the author of the ''Voynich manuscript'' is. The author expresses that there are three theories about who really created this manuscript. However, the lecturer casts doubt on these hypotheses and refutes each of the author's theories by providing several counter-arguments.
First of all, the author mentions that the author of the Voynich manuscript may be Anthony Ascham because a number of the plant illustrations in the manuscript resemble to those in Ascham's book. Nevertheless, the lecturer indicates that Anthony Ascham was an ordinary botanist and much of his plant pictures shown in his book are common plants based on well-known species. Thus, Ascham, according to the lecturer, would not create such an elaborate images and codes in the Voynich manuscript.
In the second place, the author points out that Edward Kelley, who deceived nobles by pretending to have magical power, might have created the Voynich manuscript because Kelley might create this manuscript as a fake magical book to sell to the noble. By contrast, the lecturer states that the people in the sixteenth century were easy to fool, so Kelley would not need to put so many efforts to create a such complicated manuscript to fool the noble.
Finally, the author claims that the manuscript might actually be made by Wilfrid M.Voynich himself because as an antique book dealer, he certainly had the required knowledge to make this manuscript. In the contrary, the lecturer contends that the modern technology had shown the manuscript materials, such as the pages and ink, is four hundred years old. Although Wilfrid M.Voynich might have been able to get the old manuscript pages from other old resources, he was not able to get the old ink. Thus, the lecturer concludes that the manuscript cannot be invented by Wilfrid M.Voynich.
- In 1912 a bookseller named Wilfrid M. Voynich acquired a beautifully illustrated handwritten book (manuscript) written on vellum (vellum is a material that was used for writing before the introduction of paper). The "Voynich manuscript," as it became kno 93
- Taking a lot of time to make an important decision is often viewed as a bad quality for a person. However, some people think that is a good quality for a person 44
- The most important thing that government should do to improve the heath care is to clean the environment 88
- TPO 35- Task 1 68
- Hail—pieces of ice that form and fall from clouds instead of snow or rain—has always been a problem for farmers in some areas of the United States. Hail pellets can fall with great force and destroy crops in the field. Over the last few decades, a met 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 21, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nich manuscript. In the second place, the author points out that Edward Kelley...
^^
Line 7, column 84, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Voynich
...ipt might actually be made by Wilfrid M.Voynich himself because as an antique book deal...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 356, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ges and ink, is four hundred years old. Although Wilfrid M.Voynich might have been able ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 375, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Voynich
...r hundred years old. Although Wilfrid M.Voynich might have been able to get the old man...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 579, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Voynich
...uscript cannot be invented by Wilfrid M.Voynich.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, however, may, nevertheless, really, second, so, thus, well, such as, first of all, in the second place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1567.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 305.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13770491803 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68880446364 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.504918032787 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 466.2 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5445814576 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.583333333 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.4166666667 21.698381199 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6666666667 7.06452816374 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.