The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
"Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The author, Dr. Field, has contended that his interveiew-centered method is far more superior than observetion-centered method of Dr. Karp. However, the author's argument is based on several unwarranted assumptions, which if proven invalid, will undermine the argument. The deficiencies in the argumetns need to be addressed, in order to consider it seriously.
First, Dr. Field refers to the study conducted twenty years ago. There lies the first assumption that nothing has changed in the past twenty years on the island of Tertia in terms child-rearing. It is quite possible that during the past twenty years, the villagers have adopted newer methods of parenting. Thus, the study conducted twenty years ago might be true as well.The author fails to provide data needed to support this assumption.
Second, the author cites to the interviews conducted in the group of island including Tertia and states that children spoke more about their biological parents than about other adults. The author, here, assumes that island near Tertia have the similar methods of child rearing. It may be the case that apart from their close proximity, the group of islands have nothing in common. Furthermore, how much time did the team spend on Tertia? How extensively did they study island? It is possible that they study focused more on the nearby islands and spent less time on Tertia. Moreover, regarding the interviews and childrens responses, it is quite possible that all the questions asked were related to their biological parent. Perhaps the children talked about how they do not see their parents and would like to see them more often. The assumptions are baseless. In addition, they can seriously damage the integrity of study, if the related eveidence is not presented.
In Conclusion, The author has made a hasty conclusion and has failed to make a convincing argument. If the above-mentioned assumtpion and deficiencies in the arguments are not addressed, the argement, as it stands now, is invalid.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: Moreover, regarding the interviews and childrens responses, it is quite possible that all the questions asked were related to their biological parent.
Error: childrens Suggestion: children
Sentence: In addition, they can seriously damage the integrity of study, if the related eveidence is not presented.
Error: eveidence Suggestion: evidence
Sentence: If the above-mentioned assumtpion and deficiencies in the arguments are not addressed, the argement, as it stands now, is invalid.
Error: above-mentioned Suggestion: abovementioned
Error: argement Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: assumtpion Suggestion: assumption
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 324 350
No. of Characters: 1634 1500
No. of Different Words: 169 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.243 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.043 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.795 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 115 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 81 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 58 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.053 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.835 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.579 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.483 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 81, Rule ID: SUPERIOR_THAN[2]
Message: The adjective more is normally used with to and does not need 'more' (so called implicit comparative). Probably you need to write: 'superior to'.
Suggestion: superior to
...t his interveiew-centered method is far more superior than observetion-centered method of Dr. Karp...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 154, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ntered method of Dr. Karp. However, the authors argument is based on several unwarrante...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 222, Rule ID: IF_IS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
... several unwarranted assumptions, which if proven invalid, will undermine the argu...
^^
Line 3, column 372, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
... twenty years ago might be true as well.The author fails to provide data needed to ...
^^^
Line 5, column 320, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'proximity'.
Suggestion: proximity
...t may be the case that apart from their close proximity, the group of islands have nothing in c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, second, thus, well, apart from, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1687.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22291021672 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90875399641 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.547987616099 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 507.6 705.55239521 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.5293052622 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.7894736842 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15789473684 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.171590798784 0.218282227539 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0504313681534 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0507064947417 0.0701772020484 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0892596435127 0.128457276422 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0601242636573 0.0628817314937 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.7 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.