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.
Although the author attempts to explain the reasoning behind the phenomenon of fake Palean baskets, many assumptions and hole in the argument weaken the author’s reasoning but could be fixed with the addition of further details.
The author first argues that the baskets had previously only been discovered in the immediate area of the prehistoric Palea area; they, however, do not give any measurements describing this immediate. Such lack of description of this area could very well allow for the baskets to be present in the Lithos village area, undermining the argument that the discovery of the baskets in the Lithos village area is a new, novel discovery. Evidence that this immediate area does not include the Lithos village area would strengthen the assertion that discovery of the baskets is unprecedented. The author also assumes that the presence of the baskets in the Palean area automatically indicates that the baskets were made by the Palean people. The baskets, however, could have been present in the area before or after the Palean people lived there and may not necessarily be made by the Palean people. The author could bolster this assertion by providing evidence such as carbon dating or historical records that the Palean people did indeed build the baskets found and have more evidence than the coincidence that both the Palean people and the baskets were in the same place.
The author continues to explain that Palean people could not have crossed the Brim River without boats but makes many generalizations while doing so. The author only describes the river as very deep and broad but provides no evidence that the river would in fact not be crossable without the assistance of a boat. If the author were able to provide statistics about the river, such as the depth and breadth as well as comparisons to other water systems, they would be able to confidently assert that the Palean people would not have been able to cross the river without assistance. Additionally, the author also does not consider any type of water vehicle besides a boat, leaving the possibility that the Palean may have been able to cross the river with the assistance of a different technology. This oversight undermines the argument that no Palean boats were found but could be remedied with the addition of evidence of lack of other Palean water technologies or possibilities of crossing the Brim River.
The addition of these further details is essential to bolstering the current argument and its logic by leaving no room for excluded, contradictory details. Without these additions, the argument in its current state does not provide enough information to follow that the newly discovered baskets are not unique Palean baskets.
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: 14 15
No. of Words: 451 350
No. of Characters: 2253 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.608 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.996 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.583 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 118 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 73 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 32.214 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.803 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.786 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.436 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.651 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.235 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 894, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...cessarily be made by the Palean people. The author could bolster this assertion by ...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...the baskets were in the same place. The author continues to explain that Palean...
^^^
Line 5, column 151, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...es many generalizations while doing so. The author only describes the river as very...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, so, then, well, while, in fact, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2300.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 451.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09977827051 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65740365579 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.412416851441 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 728.1 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 32.0 22.8473053892 140% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 42.8398179268 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.285714286 119.503703932 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.2142857143 23.324526521 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.85714285714 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
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: 0.225664446286 0.218282227539 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0922165203061 0.0743258471296 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0659325796021 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106587667633 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0979071783902 0.0628817314937 156% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 14.3799401198 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.0 48.3550499002 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.197005988 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 11.1389221557 133% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.9071856287 160% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.