The prediction in the reading is that the abstract miniature statues’ value will increase and the value of life-size statue of human will decrease, since the Kalinese artists use molds rather than sculpting tools or techniques to make the bigger ones. However, before we reach a final prediction, there are several questions need to be addressed, which can help us assess this statement more comprehensively.
First, the author conclude that Kalinese did not use sculpting tools and techniques because of the discovery of molds of human heads and hands. Nonetheless, one question then needs to be answered is that whether the molds and sculpting tools and techniques are mutual exclusion, in other words, is there any possible that artists use both the two strategies to crate their masterpieces. It is reasonable to use sculpting tools and techniques to repair some broken statues, since the clay structure is a little fragile. In addition, sculpting tools and techniques can also be used in producing procedure. Considering the mold progress is somewhat rough, artistes may also need sculping tools to do some ornamental works, like polishing or carving. Either scenario, if true, would render the author’s prediction bootless.
Moreover, another question needs to be answered is that whether the miniature statues were made for the same function as the life-size statues of human figures. It is possible that those small ones play another role in Kalinese lives. For example, the life-size statues may be made for daily use, while the miniatures may be symbols of their belief, like Indian who consecrate lots of gods’ statues. In their imagine, gods are different from mundane people and the small-size shows their pure respect, so that the statues were made abstract and miniature. If this is the case, the author’s statement would be severely undermined
Finally, the author makes his/her prediction is that the life-size sculptures will devalue, and the miniatures will appreciate. Nevertheless, another imperative question to ask is that is there really an exact definition of artwork’s value. Given a single artwork, five connoisseurs may give five deviate evaluation. This is because different people have his/him different perspective and principle of art.
Thus, we cannot predict general value of these status, it is all depend on individual:
those who addict to human-size artworks would continue to appreciate the life-size statues whatever their made procedure, while those fascinate mold-made statues may do not think highly of the miniature once they know it was by sculpting tools. If this is the case, the author’s prediction is by no means reasonable.
In conclusion, only after the aforementioned questions are adequately addressed can we effectively evaluate the author’s statement and reach a logically sound prediction.
e-rater score report
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 449 350
No. of Characters: 2339 1500
No. of Different Words: 226 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.603 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.209 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.741 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 168 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 76 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.45 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.915 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.517 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.118 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...statement would be severely undermined Finally, the author makes his/her predic...
^^^
Line 8, column 42, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this status' or 'these statuses'?
Suggestion: this status; these statuses
...hus, we cannot predict general value of these status, it is all depend on individual: thos...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 87, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... status, it is all depend on individual: those who addict to human-size artworks ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, really, so, then, thus, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2429.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 447.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43400447427 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59808378696 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88086200545 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.523489932886 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 752.4 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.7101987535 57.8364921388 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.842105263 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5263157895 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.57894736842 5.70786347227 150% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => 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: 0.166048409217 0.218282227539 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0489870043914 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0543917849929 0.0701772020484 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0738704653152 0.128457276422 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0566533447008 0.0628817314937 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.66 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 98.500998004 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.