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.
The critique presented by the author is dubious as it is based on assumptions which are unconvincing and ambiguous. The author has concluded that the Palean baskets are not uniquely Palean on the basis of recent discovery of a similar basket in another neighboring village. And secondly on the assumption that it could not have reached Lithos as the two villages are separated by a very deep and broad river. The author further tries to strengthen his argument by stating that as no Palean boat have been discovered so ancient Paleans would not have been able to cross it. But this argument suffers from many logical fallacies.
Firstly the absence of boat does not successfully conclude that the river could not be crossed. The author has stated that the river is very deep and broad but has not considered whether it was of the same depth and breadth then. It is quite possible that the physical characteristics of the area have changed since then.
Secondly the two villages lie in immediate vicinity of each other so it is not abnormal that things of one place are found in the other. A small object like basket can easily flow through the river and reach the other side or by any other natural means. The author has mentioned just one route between the villages. There may be some other route. Even if there isn't a river can dry in summers or freeze in winters making it possible to commute between the two villages.
Thirdly it is also possible that Palean boats existed but haven't been found yet. They could have been destroyed by natural calamities like floods, landslides or earthquakes. They could have been eroded away years ago. Just like the baskets they may also have reached a neighboring village.
To sum up the author's argument is weak and has overlooked many facts. It lacks conviction and raises many doubts. The author needs to analyze the facts more carefully to strengthen his argument.
flaws:
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.65 21.0
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 333 350
No. of Characters: 1554 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.272 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.667 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.433 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 102 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 78 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 46 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 26 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.65 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.213 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.299 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.544 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.074 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5