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 concludes that Palean baskets are not originated from Palean because they are recently found out that the traces of these baskets are found in the village Lithos across the brim river from Palea, the author concluded that it was not originally from Palea because of the deep river which can be only crossed by the boat and no Palean boat is found. The argument that concludes the Palean baskets are not actually from Palena has not reasoned correctly they are many flaws regarding the assumption about the origin of Palean baskets and the boats. I shall suggest ways to improve the reasoning so that the argument has some validity.
First of all, the argument assumes that woven baskets are of a distinct pattern that are found only in Palea and therefore they are made by Palean people state that the author is not talking about the present-day scenario but which is from past assumptions which can be either true or false. Further, he assumes that recently archaeologists have found a Palean-basket in Lithos which does not mean that they are any actually made by the Lithos and the statement does not provide any evidence regarding the traces of making the Palean baskets by Lithos.
Second, the author said that the Lithos is across Brim river with the other side having Palea village and stated that no boats where found there is no clear description of neither what happened to boats nor any traces of people migrating from the Palean to Lithos.
Hence I conclude that the reasoning is flawed because the boats were not present recently but there is no description of the past and no description regarding the migration of people is also not mentioned in the given premise. I believe that the argument would vastly improve if there is a piece of clear information regarding the migration of people and any surveys done in Palean or Lithos villages or any traces of the boats in the past.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 15
No. of Words: 331 350
No. of Characters: 1559 1500
No. of Different Words: 133 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.265 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.71 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.36 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 109 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 70 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 44 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 27 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 41.375 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.481 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.875 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.501 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.747 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.213 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 198, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'boat'.
Suggestion: boat
...description of neither what happened to boats nor any traces of people migrating from...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...grating from the Palean to Lithos. Hence I conclude that the reasoning is flawed...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, hence, if, regarding, second, so, therefore, talking about, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1589.0 2260.96107784 70% => OK
No of words: 331.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.80060422961 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38112084822 2.78398813304 86% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 204.123752495 67% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.410876132931 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 497.7 705.55239521 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 19.7664670659 40% => 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: 41.0 22.8473053892 179% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.3433756296 57.8364921388 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 198.625 119.503703932 166% => OK
Words per sentence: 41.375 23.324526521 177% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.5 5.70786347227 219% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197819442122 0.218282227539 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0905685901506 0.0743258471296 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0618743016978 0.0701772020484 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125507752745 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0622241372232 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.9 14.3799401198 152% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.32 48.3550499002 79% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.1 12.197005988 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.45 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 98.500998004 54% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 12.3882235529 141% => OK
gunning_fog: 18.4 11.1389221557 165% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.9071856287 151% => 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.