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 author of the excerpt states that the woven baskets with a particular distinctive pattern, or the so-called Palean Baskets were not uniquely Palean, and cites which points towards the presence of the baskets in village Lithos, which is across the Brim river from Palea. Although the argument does seem plausible, it misses out on certain specific evidence to evaluate its credibility.
The excerpt states that were initially found only in the immediate vicinity of prehistoric village of Palea. Though this might indicate that the Palean people were the only people involved in the Basket’s creation, the author does not state that the time period in history in which the Baskets were created, and the time period in history in which only the indigenous Palean thrived in Palea, coincides with each other. It is quite possible that certain outsiders might have invaded Palean, and brought with them these Baskets. Any evidence pointing towards a possibility of people from outside the Palean village having stayed in Palea, suggests that the Palean baskets might not be indigenous.
Also, the author cites that recent studies have revealed that the same basket was present in Lithos village. In the excerpt, Palea is mentioned as a “prehistoric” village and Lithos as an “ancienct” village. Thus, it is important to establish whether these villages thrived during the same time interval in history, because it is possible that the Lithos village might have been created centuries after the Palea village was established. The timelines need to match because if the Lithos village was established many decades after the Palea village, it weakens the argument that the baskets were not strictly Palean, since it indicates a high possibility of the baskets having passed onto the Lithos village later.
Also, it is stated that the two villages are separated by the Brim river, described as broad and deep. According to the author, this characteristic of the river posits the fact that a boat is required to cross the river, and no Palean boats have been found. But, there is an equally likely possibility of the people from the Lithos village crossing the river using their boats. There is no mention of whether the Lithos people had built boats, or not. Such an evidence can indicate that the Baskets were not created in Palean, but rather they could have been transported from Lithos. Further, there is no mention of any land routes from Palean to Lithos. So, if the possibility of a land route from Palean to Lithos exists, then the baskets could be indigenous to Palean , and could have been transported to Lithos through that route.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 148, 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
.... In the excerpt, Palea is mentioned as a 'prehistoric' village and Lit...
^
Line 7, column 771, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...he baskets could be indigenous to Palean , and could have been transported to Lith...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, then, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2236.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 437.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11670480549 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57214883401 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6764924998 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.439359267735 0.468620217663 94% => OK
syllable_count: 698.4 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => 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: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.67365269461 478% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.2578045018 57.8364921388 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.529411765 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7058823529 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.70588235294 5.70786347227 30% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.318530339617 0.218282227539 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109603936745 0.0743258471296 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0823145091104 0.0701772020484 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.198543240524 0.128457276422 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0446129544498 0.0628817314937 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.