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 argument that pemchints is a musical instrument makes a number of unwarranted assumptions regarding the fact that Pemchints were mostly found at places of rituals and celebrations, they were excavated with other musical artifacts and pemchints was used by Dodecan hunters to repel dangerous wildlife. Taken as whole, these unstated assumptions render the argument highly suspect. Indeed, if these unstated assumptions do not hold true, the argument totally falls apart.
Firstly, the argument assumes pemchints were musical instrument because they were found at places of rituals and celebrations. True, pemchints might have hollowed bones, shells or wood and when whirled in the air, they might make sonorous sounds. But the fact these instruments are found near places of ritual and celebrations does not make them musical instruments. Pemchints might be other forms of utensils the Dodecans use in eating or might be one of the tools the Dodecans use in appeasing their gods. Nothing in the argument clearly states that pemchints were used as musical instrument at the Dodecans ritual and celebration site. Thus, assuming pemchint is a musical instrument is flawed.
Secondly, the argument assumes pemchints are musical instrument because they were excavate with other musical artifacts. However, pemchints might be used to produce other musical instruments. Since it is exhumed alongside other musical artifacts, it might be a tool used by musical instrument makers to make other musical artifacts. Furthermore, other factors might have led to pemchints being located among these musical artifacts such as flood moving them from their initial site to the site of these musical artifacts. Therefore, assuming pemchint is a musical instrument because it was excavated with other forms of musical artifact is invalid because it was not shown in the argument that pemchints are used by the people of Dodecans to make sound or to compose musical.
Thirdly, the argument assumes pemchints sound was used by Dodecans hunters to repel dangerous wildlife. The hunters might have other means of repeling dangerous animals such as using talisman or camouflaging to dress like these animals. Pemchints might be used for other purposes such as animal traps since these instruments are made with hollowed bones or shells. Additionally, pemchints might be used as utensils by the hunters during their hunting voyage. Ergo, the assumption that pemchint sound is used solely to repel dangerous animals is flawed.
In summary, the argument that pemchint is used as a musical instrument among the people of Dodecan makes numeous unwarranted assumptions that seriously impairs its validation. Unless these unstated assumptions are addressed, the argument totally falls apart. Thus, archaeologst assuming that pemchints are musical instruments might be misleading.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 11 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 439 350
No. of Characters: 2367 1500
No. of Different Words: 162 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.577 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.392 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.662 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 185 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 159 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.955 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.523 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.394 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.572 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.166 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 83, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'excavated'.
Suggestion: excavated
...re musical instrument because they were excavate with other musical artifacts. However, ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, thus, in summary, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2425.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 439.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52391799544 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57737117129 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74242842247 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.380410022779 0.468620217663 81% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 751.5 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 57.2480466302 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.227272727 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9545454545 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.70786347227 105% => 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 : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.302336448754 0.218282227539 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121842745216 0.0743258471296 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0716901516932 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.200746176373 0.128457276422 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0379151291777 0.0628817314937 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.82 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.