The author concludes that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. In support of this claim, he states that these woven baskets were discovered by the archaeologists in another ancient village named Lithos situated across the Brim river from Palea. Also, per author since the river was deep and broad, there was no other way to cross the river than the Palean boats and evidently no Palean boats were ever found. Although, the author demonstrates his argument assertively but there are few assumptions that need to be undertaken before culminating to a conclusion.
The author claims that the only way to cross the Brim River was to cross it by boat since the river is deep and broad. But he fails to address the given assumptions. Was the river broad throughout its stretch? It is possible that after covering a few miles along the banks of the river, it narrowed and there was a scope of crossing it by an over-bridge. Also, author claims that there were no Palean boats found which is pretty obscure. It is possible that the Palean boats were exclusively used for trade purposes and when archaeologists visited Palean, the boats travelled to some other village for trade activities. It is also not addressed if the Paleans really owned any boats in reality. Another possibility is that Paleans summoned boats from nearby villages, used them for their own good and paid for their services as and when required.
Now, since no substantial claims have been made by the author about Paleans not being able to cross the river, it is possible that the villagers could commute using other means. Possibly, a number of skilled workers manufacturing the woven baskets migrated to Lithos and set up their business units. Also, another possibility is that the woven baskets were used by the Paleans to carry goods or other commodities to other villagers as a part of their trade activities. This gives rise to another plausible reason why the distinctive woven baskets were found in Lithos.
All these assumptions clearly weaken author’s claim that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. Although, he substantiates his thoughts but it not quite clear how credible these claims are and how veracious they tend to be. The above mentioned claims need addressal and unless this is taken into consideration, the entire argument tends to portray a vague vision on author’s behalf.
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: The above mentioned claims need addressal and unless this is taken into consideration, the entire argument tends to portray a vague vision on author's behalf.
Error: addressal Suggestion: No alternate word
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 401 350
No. of Characters: 1960 1500
No. of Different Words: 191 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.475 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.888 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.518 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 125 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 89 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 61 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.105 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.518 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.368 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.493 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 580, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ken before culminating to a conclusion. The author claims that the only way to c...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, really, so, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 16.3942115768 18% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2021.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 401.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03990024938 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64055746067 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.481296758105 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 621.0 705.55239521 88% => 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: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => 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: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.3387737191 57.8364921388 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.368421053 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1052631579 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.68421052632 5.70786347227 30% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.166906444415 0.218282227539 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.056833804211 0.0743258471296 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0507893970419 0.0701772020484 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112208452112 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0627210265579 0.0628817314937 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.75 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 98.500998004 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.