Archaeologists have long thought that an artifact called the pemchint was used by Dodecan people solely as a musical instrument Pemchints consist of hollowed pieces of bone shell or wood that are tied together with long straps When whirled in the air the

Essay topics:

Archaeologists have long thought that an artifact called the pemchint was used by Dodecan people solely as a musical instrument. Pemchints consist of hollowed pieces of bone, shell, or wood that are tied together with long straps. When whirled in the air, the pemchints create pleasant tones. Until recently, pemchints were found only at locations known to be used for Dodecan rituals and celebrations. Additionally, they were always excavated in proximity to other musical artifacts. Recently, however, a pemchint was found along with Dodecan hunters' tools located miles from the nearest known Dodecan settlement, while no other music-related objects were found in the area. Clearly, then, the pemchint was used by Dodecan hunters, who most probably used the sounds to repel dangerous wildlife.

Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.

The author claims that the pemchint, an artifact used by the Dodecan people, was used by the Dodecan hunters probably to intimidate the dangerous wildlife while hunting. The author comes to this conclusion based on evidence from a recent excavation where a pemchint was found along with the Dodecan hunters' tools. At first glance, though the author's argument seems convincing, upon further contemplation, it is plausible that there could be other reasons as well as to why the pemchint was found along with hunters' tools.

Firstly, the pemchint was found in an excavation far away from the nearest known Dodecan settlement. It is also worthwhile to note that there were no other musical instruments in the excavation. These facts bolster other explanations more than they strengthen the conclusion that the pemchint was used by the Dodecan hunters'. Given the description of the pemchint in the argument, one can infer that it is not very hard for someone to make one even with a mediocre intellectual ability. And since, they can be made with hollow bones and long straps, it could very well be the case that a Dodecan hunter made the pemchint after he gorged on a carnal animal once he became complacent with the meal.

Secondly, the author clearly mentions that there has been only one such excavation where pemchint was found along with the hunters' tools. This evidence gives more the reason to believe that the pemchint was primarily used for rituals and celebrations rather than being used by the hunters. Had the pemchint had actually been used by the hunters, then it would certainly be the case that it would have been found more often than not along with hunters' tools and not with the other musical artifacts.

Finally, since the pemchant was primarily used to make sounds and it is imperative to maintain the utmost silence during hunting so as not to get detected by the prey by the sound of the pemchint, it is patent that the Dodecan hunters never used the pemchint to aid them in hunting. If the hunters used the pemchint to keep the vicious wildlife away, the sound of the pemchint would equally be heard by the target which would then make the target aware of the hunters and aid escaping. Hence, it is fatuous to consider that the pemchint was used by the Dodecan hunters while hunting.

In conclusion, the argument, as it stands, is unpersuasive as it relies on very poor reasoning unsupported by considerable evidence. One would be able to better evaluate the conclusion if the author has provided us with sound evidence.

Votes
Average: 6 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 343, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ters tools. At first glance, though the authors argument seems convincing, upon further...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, firstly, hence, if, second, secondly, so, then, well, while, as to, in conclusion, as well as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2123.0 2260.96107784 94% => OK
No of words: 435.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88045977011 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52531220722 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 204.123752495 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.432183908046 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9642950996 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.6875 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1875 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.8125 5.70786347227 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.265891560341 0.218282227539 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103672556742 0.0743258471296 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0507112152422 0.0701772020484 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151686844531 0.128457276422 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0724690772077 0.0628817314937 115% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 435 350
No. of Characters: 2070 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.567 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.759 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.435 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 31 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.188 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.082 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.427 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.639 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.181 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5