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.
To corroborate the claim that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique, one would need to consider the implications made in the argument. Firstly, the fact that the baskets were found near Palea does not necessarily imply that the Palean people wove them. Second, there is a presumption that a deep and broad river can only be crossed by boat. Finally, the baskets are assumed to be Palean, whereas it may have originated from the village across the river and reached Palea later on.
To evaluate the first claim, we would need to be sure that the Paleans indeed wove the baskets and that they were not transported from elsewhere. It could have been the case that another village situated in a hitherto undiscovered location was the origin of the baskets. This alternative source of the baskets may very well be Lithos, the village across the river, because of the remains of the ‘Palean’ baskets found there. In order to buttress the idea of this alternative source, archaeologists would need to search for instruments or machines that may have been used to weave the baskets in Lithos.
The argument posits that the only viable method of crossing a broad and deep river is a boat. Archaeologists wishing to weaken this claim may look for the remains of bridges or other similar structures near the river banks to suggest that the Paleans may have constructed small bridges, with locally available raw materials such as wood, to cross the river. On the contrary, the discovery of boats at the bottom of the Brim river would support the claim about the uniqueness of Palean baskets, although, one cannot guarantee the origin of the baskets as Palea.
An increase in the number of excavations in close proximity to the villages and the river Brim will prove to be beneficial to the Archaeologists. Not only will they stumble upon new evidence that may lead to radical changes in their hypothesis, they may also find the missing information that is key to validating their existing premises.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 340 350
No. of Characters: 1621 1500
No. of Different Words: 169 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.294 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.768 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.531 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 106 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 81 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 45 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 28 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.154 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.026 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.692 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.388 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.596 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.118 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 45, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'proximity'.
Suggestion: proximity
...ncrease in the number of excavations in close proximity to the villages and the river Brim will...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, look, may, second, so, well, whereas, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1682.0 2260.96107784 74% => OK
No of words: 340.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94705882353 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69341597593 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.517647058824 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 518.4 705.55239521 73% => 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: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.7912681271 57.8364921388 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.384615385 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1538461538 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.53846153846 5.70786347227 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.210817589866 0.218282227539 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0821309389313 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0390589212457 0.0701772020484 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130598371073 0.128457276422 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0709210537617 0.0628817314937 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 98.500998004 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.