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 archaeol

Essay topics:

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.

Woven baskets are very trendy and still in use, now-a-days. If we go back to prehistoric times such as ‘Palean’ era, one will come across the most aesthetic piece of woven basket. However, some claim that these baskets designs were not solely of palean’s. On contrary, no claim has been stated to corroborate that these baskets were not palean’s forte or unique to them. The author has not put-forward cogent reasons to validate his argument. One cannot come to a concrete decision just based on assumptions and not evidences.
To begin with, the proponent states that archaeologists have found the baskets similar to palean’s across a river and therefore, these are not their patent work. But the author fails to put-forth reasonable evidence to validate this point such as, there is no description or images provided by the author claiming that both the baskets (the paleans and the one excavated across brim’s river) are replica of each other. In addition, there could be a possibility that these designs might be similar but it is not proved whether, palean’s have imitated it from others. There might be a chance that the case is reverse and other tribe people might have emulated the paleans. Hence, it is not accurate to accuse the paleans that they might have replicated someone else’s work.
Secondly, the author posits that the river is deep and broad and is quite impossible to cross it without a boat, and no sign of palean boat have been observed. On the other hand, no information has been given if the palean’s boat had some unique marking to demarcate it from other boats. It could be possible that their boat was as prosaic as the other boats and consequently, excavators were not able to distinguish. Furthermore, there could be a chance that their boat might have been stolen or have been modified by someone else and as a result, archaeologists were unable to find any boat near the shore to claim it as paleans. To add on, one cannot be sure of the archaeologist’s result, there might have been some error and as a result, they missed the boat. Thus, this inaccuracy also needs to be taken under consideration as no evidence has been cited about the boat. Therefore, it is unreasonable to state that paleans work is not unique as there might be various causes that boat have been ignored or not bought into attention.
Lastly, even if the paleans basket were found at a distinct place still one cannot conclude if, they have replicated or that the baskets were not unique to them. For instance, what if paleans were peripatetic traveller’s and as a result, they visited and established their residence among several regions. Consequently, there designs were excavated from various places. In this scenario, it would be quixotic to propose that these designs were not unique to paleans. Henceforth, the author should come up with some valid arguments.
In conclusion, to accuse someone of their creativeness or uniqueness, the author should consider the above questions for a convincing and eloquent argument. And as author has not provided the many facets of the unanswered questions; it would not be precise to indict paleans of a charge which is not yet justifiable or well grounded.

Votes
Average: 5.5 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, thus, well, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, to begin with, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 40.0 19.6327345309 204% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 25.0 11.1786427146 224% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 28.8173652695 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2690.0 2260.96107784 119% => OK
No of words: 545.0 441.139720559 124% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93577981651 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83169070408 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72027615604 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.444036697248 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 846.9 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.1227503442 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.6 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.56 5.70786347227 150% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.67664670659 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.215233519756 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0679525996217 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0510783205292 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118903222483 0.128457276422 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0526380678334 0.0628817314937 84% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 98.500998004 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 545 350
No. of Characters: 2598 1500
No. of Different Words: 243 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.832 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.767 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.548 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 175 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 80 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.708 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.758 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.792 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.297 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.355 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.121 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 2 5