Ancient artefacts are preciously valued irrespective of their geographical locations or their exact depiction of art. Apart from being a vestige of the past; these remains provide some inkling in the cultural values prevailing in the time. In the preceeding argument, the author predicts that the Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style because molds could be only used for life-size sculptures, citing the findings of archaeologists in Kali Island. He goes on to make a further statement about the future: the life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures increase in value. Though the argument may have merit, it rests largely on questionable premises and various implicit assumptions, far-fetched inferences, and given the evidences provided, seems utterly tenuous.
The primary deficiency in the presented claim is the lack of supporting facts. To cite as evidence, the writer mentions the findings of archaelogists in the Kali Island who find molds of human heads and hands. Did these molds match with the artistic style of the life-sized scriptures? Were these as accurate as the prized artefacts? Without comparing the similarity or the lack of these evidences, any claim made would be preposterous. Several other purposes could be served by these molds: to study the human anatomy better for the craftsmen, making visualizations easier for sculpting, or possibly these molds were a piece of art in themsewlves. One cannot deduce anything reasonable without answering these questions.
In addition to the absense of any verifiable data, the contention of the writer also suffers from unproven assumptions. Various possibilities exist. Some arguments against the offered line of reasoning are intriguing; were the molds made by the same craftsmen who sculpted the life-sized statues? Perhaps, there was other section of the artists who specialized in perfecting these molds, and these were not related on any significant terms. Moreover, the claim that since no tool has been found on the islands, no tool existed is an extremely weak claim. What if these are hidden// underground, or got carried away by the floods? Simply because tools have not been been found does not disprove their existence.
All things considered, the author's diction fails to leave a logical impression on the rational mind. Given the lack of substantiation, arbitrary assumptions, flaws in the logic, unproven justifications render the argument baseless. Without the remedies suggested previously, documented argument is likely to have a tepid response and will not persuade the readers by large.
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: To cite as evidence, the writer mentions the findings of archaelogists in the Kali Island who find molds of human heads and hands.
Error: archaelogists Suggestion: archeologists
Sentence: Several other purposes could be served by these molds: to study the human anatomy better for the craftsmen, making visualizations easier for sculpting, or possibly these molds were a piece of art in themsewlves.
Error: themsewlves Suggestion: themselves
Sentence: In addition to the absense of any verifiable data, the contention of the writer also suffers from unproven assumptions.
Error: absense Suggestion: absence
---------------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/collectors-prize-a…
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 408 350
No. of Characters: 2172 1500
No. of Different Words: 241 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.494 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.324 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.838 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.545 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.727 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.273 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.253 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.431 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.027 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 361, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ues were abstract and entirely different in style because molds could be only use...
^^
Line 3, column 667, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of art in themsewlves. One cannot deduce anything reasonable without answering th...
^^
Line 5, column 661, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: been
...e floods? Simply because tools have not been been found does not disprove their existence...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 28, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...istence. All things considered, the authors diction fails to leave a logical impres...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, may, moreover, so, while, apart from, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2232.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 408.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47058823529 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94499751793 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602941176471 0.468620217663 129% => OK
syllable_count: 693.9 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.1422769116 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.454545455 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5454545455 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.68181818182 5.70786347227 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.18745847906 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0464090700632 0.0743258471296 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518559804541 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0994173300486 0.128457276422 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457282820105 0.0628817314937 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.06 8.32208582834 121% => OK
difficult_words: 143.0 98.500998004 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.