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.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The argument proposes that the Palean basket, which is a distinct kind of woven basket that had only been excavated near the village of Palean is actually not confined to the Palean people. Due to the fact that this kind of basket has been found in the village of Lithos. And there is no sign that Palean people could cross the boundary, which is a river, between Palean and Lithos. However, to my opinion, there are flaws in the argument.
First, the argument is begging the question that there are only two ancient villages in that area. It is possible that there was a village that the people were having a knack of building boats and good at trading. Therefore, this group of people can have commercial activity between Palean and Lithos, thus the Palean basket would be brought to the Lithos village. Unless the argument can reinforce the insular condition between Palean and Lithos, it cannot assert that there was no trading, whether it was direct or indirect, among them.
Second, it is argument assumption that without any remain of the boat is an indication io the inavalibility of the boat in the Palean village. Perhaps people from Palean used material that is easy to be eroded to build their ships. Or perhaps they use the same material to build their home and so archaeologists cannot tell the difference between the house and boat structure. It is too assertive to say that lack of the trait of the appearance of the boat is associating that people could not cross the river in the ancient world.
Last, the argument is presuming that the landscape of that area has never changed. Since the argument does not reveal that how far the two villages can be traced back, the possibility is very high that the river which is dividing the two villages is as large as it was in the ancient world. Maybe it was a brook or maybe it did not exist in the age of the villages were thriving. Until the argument can clarify this crucial factor, it cannot state that it is impossible for the ancient people in the Palean village to across that river.
In sum, the argument fails to give more information that is pivotal to determine the assertion that the argument has made. More factors are not taken into account, factors like the outer forces that could have commercial trade and the potential explanation for the lack of excavation of boat.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 448, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lar condition between Palean and Lithos, it cannot assert that there was no tradi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, thus, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.6327345309 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 13.6137724551 184% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1942.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 415.0 441.139720559 94% => OK
Chars per words: 4.67951807229 5.12650576532 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37532679525 2.78398813304 85% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 204.123752495 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.44578313253 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 603.0 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0269408626 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.888888889 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0555555556 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.94444444444 5.70786347227 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185988456933 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0630339764832 0.0743258471296 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0711874693853 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10670593931 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0902024892473 0.0628817314937 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.16 12.5979740519 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.55 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
---------------------
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: 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.