Voynich manuscript
The reading and the lecture are both about the accuracy of an ancient manuscript called "Voynich manuscript", which was acquired by a bookseller. The author discusses three theories in order to reject the veracity of this manuscript. On the other hand, the professor is not convinced of this, and casts doubt on each of the theories presented in the reading. Point to the other side of the story, he is of the opinion that any of each persons mentioned in the passage can not be the author of the book through the following truths.
Firstly, the author argues that the book is an actual work of a magical or scientific work, and Anthony Ascham is the probable author of it. This specific argument is challenged by the lecture. According to the professor, the person who is mentioned in the reading as the probable author does not possess any original idea. Also, Ascham has not ever presented any original and personal book or knowledge. Furthermore, the professor asserts that the herbal depicted by Ascham are also gained form other sources.
Secondly, the author disputes that this manuscript is fake and the passages are meaningless. Additionally, the reading provides an example of Kelly to illustrates this notion. Kelly had created a manuscript utilizing made-up alphabets and random orders, and since his book looked magical the wealthy people of that time were willing to pay money for it. In contrast, the lecture opposes the viewpoint by asserting that this book is accurately organized. However, noble people at that time were not genuine enough to comprehend the complexity of the book and they hardly could recognize fake material. Since a good deal of accuracy and work had been put for this book, the second theory can not be verified.
Finally, the author averts that Voynich himself can be that author of book in order to acquire money from affluent people. Since Voynich was a book dealer, he was totally familiar with ancient books. The lecturer's stance is that the books material, the ink and the paper, has been dated by modern methods to 4000 years ago. Even Voynich could find old paper for his work, little in no way he could find a 4000 years old ink.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-20 | Zmx_109 | 80 | view |
| 2023-02-13 | zaid | 73 | view |
| 2023-01-19 | nikki07hung | 81 | view |
| 2022-11-11 | lucy_Taiwan | 81 | view |
| 2022-10-25 | _sta | 78 | view |
- conduct a thorough investigation of Peary s records and equipment At the end of the investigation the committee concluded that Peary s accounts were consistent and persuasive and declared that he had indeed reached the North Pole 80
- Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they respond to the specific points made reading passage 3
- Would you prefer to take courses taught by professors with whom you have already had other classes during your past years of study or would you prefer to take courses with professors whose classes you have never taken before Why 90
- do you agree or disagree that athletes and entertainers deserve to have more privacy than what they have now. 60
- Sometimes we are assigned to work in a group on a project Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The group will be helped more by person who will be willing to do what other group members want than by person who often strongly insists that 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...re also gained form other sources. Secondly, the author disputes that this ...
^^^
Line 9, column 205, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...otally familiar with ancient books. The lecturers stance is that the books material, the ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, as to, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 10.4613686534 210% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1828.0 1373.03311258 133% => OK
No of words: 373.0 270.72406181 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90080428954 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39467950092 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59586656842 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 145.348785872 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501340482574 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 560.7 419.366225166 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.8056477808 49.2860985944 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.2105263158 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6315789474 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.42105263158 7.06452816374 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
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: 0.181885078696 0.272083759551 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0539356154257 0.0996497079465 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0880843187378 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112830387647 0.162205337803 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.089169040941 0.0443174109184 201% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 63.6247240618 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.