This argument that the Pallean buskets may be not uniquely Pallean is unconvincing because it relies on some assumption that not necessarily true. There are three areas that merit futher explanation before this author should receive any degree of credibility.
My first problem with this argument is that author assumes woven buskets would be made not only by antique Pallean people , but also Lithos people, as well.
However, in this argument are not any facts given by author that Lithos people made it firstly. The author could enhance this position by founding such kind of baskets in other places. Clearly in another side of Brime River, where was situated the Lithos.
This brings me to the second point . The assumption that the Pallean people could visited with this baskets other places, but by author hypothesis the Pallean people had not a boats to across the Brim River. Inspite of this, we can suppose that Pallean’s could travel by other ways, for example by using raft for across the river.
Lastly, I take the issue with the woven baskets would not created not only Pallean even not in Lithos. I suspect, it is possible that woven baskets would be import from other places, but it also possible it was delivered from Pallean to the Lithos.
There are just too many holes in this argument, so it is difficult to take the author seriously. Unless some futher evidence in each of the three areas described above, the premises that are presented insufficient proof that is viable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uld receive any degree of credibility. My first problem with this argument is t...
^^
Line 2, column 124, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... made not only by antique Pallean people , but also Lithos people, as well. Ho...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...le , but also Lithos people, as well. However, in this argument are not any fa...
^^
Line 4, column 35, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...hos. This brings me to the second point . The assumption that the Pallean people ...
^^
Line 4, column 82, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'visit'
Suggestion: visit
...ssumption that the Pallean people could visited with this baskets other places, but by ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 95, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...t the Pallean people could visited with this baskets other places, but by author hyp...
^^^^
Line 4, column 173, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...or hypothesis the Pallean people had not a boats to across the Brim River. Inspit...
^^
Line 4, column 175, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a boat' or simply 'boats'?
Suggestion: a boat; boats
... hypothesis the Pallean people had not a boats to across the Brim River. Inspite of th...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...le by using raft for across the river. Lastly, I take the issue with the woven ...
^^
Line 5, column 61, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'create'
Suggestion: create
... issue with the woven baskets would not created not only Pallean even not in Lithos. I ...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 237, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nted insufficient proof that is viable.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, second, so, well, for example, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1250.0 2260.96107784 55% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 254.0 441.139720559 58% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92125984252 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.56307096286 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.35444175891 2.78398813304 85% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 204.123752495 65% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523622047244 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 388.8 705.55239521 55% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.4501767433 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.1538461538 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5384615385 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.70786347227 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 5.25449101796 209% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0711274056007 0.218282227539 33% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0297140584458 0.0743258471296 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0394210315207 0.0701772020484 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0443136384414 0.128457276422 34% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0427148649669 0.0628817314937 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 14.3799401198 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 98.500998004 58% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.