Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author argues that evidence has come to light recently that suggests that a specific style of woven basket previously believed to belong distinctly to the prehistoric village of Palea was in fact not unique to the Palean people. The evidence the author cites is the discovery of one such basket in the ancient village of Lithos. Since this village is across the Brim River and no Palean boats have been discovered the author concludes these basket then must not be uniquely Palean. Though this conclusion may seem logical at first glance upon further investigation evidence is lacking.
For one do we know that the Brim River was deep at the time of these prehistoric villages. The author is vague on this point it is simply stated that the river is broad and deep. The depth of a river is not a constant, this is something that is continually changing due to precipitation, erosion, and natural disasters such as earthquakes. Evidence indicating the depth of the river around the time of these people could potentially strengthen or weaken the authors argument. If the river really was deep in this time period then the argument is strengthened, but if it was shallow and the Palean people would have been able to cross by foot the argument is weakened if not completely refuted.
Trade routes among villages could get very complex. Investigating the trade routes of the Palean people and surrounding villages to see if it connects them to the Brim people at all could provide evidence weakening the authors argument. It was very common for multiple villages to trade goods amongst one another in parts of the world. It may be possible that the Palean people traded their baskets in exchange for other goods with a village on the same side of the river of them. Then perhaps this village had access to boats and traded the basket they received from the Palean people with the Lithos people. This would thus negate the requirement that the Palean people have a boat to explain how their basket got across the Brim river if it was deep.
The evidence of finding the basket across the river in the Lithos village may be indicative that they weren't uniquely Palean. But the authors argument is not sufficient in evidence to make these claims and further investigating needs to be done.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 396 350
No. of Characters: 1868 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.461 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.717 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.443 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 135 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 82 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 56 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 26 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.294 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.88 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.647 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.351 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.543 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.147 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 440, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this basket' or 'these baskets'?
Suggestion: this basket; these baskets
...ve been discovered the author concludes these basket then must not be uniquely Palean. Thoug...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 487, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Though” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...asket then must not be uniquely Palean. Though this conclusion may seem logical at fir...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 459, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ld potentially strengthen or weaken the authors argument. If the river really was deep ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 695, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... is weakened if not completely refuted. Trade routes among villages could get ve...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 220, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ll could provide evidence weakening the authors argument. It was very common for multip...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 103, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...hos village may be indicative that they werent uniquely Palean. But the authors argume...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 135, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...at they werent uniquely Palean. But the authors argument is not sufficient in evidence ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, really, so, then, thus, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1903.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 395.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81772151899 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49925353381 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.440506329114 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 597.6 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.3910345857 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.941176471 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2352941176 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.58823529412 5.70786347227 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 8.20758483034 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.157057151294 0.218282227539 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0577951728461 0.0743258471296 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0611134952141 0.0701772020484 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106024128032 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0697281384105 0.0628817314937 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.78 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.