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.
Although it seems true that as baskets with those specific patterns did not just belong to Palea people as they found in other far sites too, the author’s argument is not convincing and there are a plethora of flaws in his assumption about the denying of baskets originality.
Firstly, as these baskets were found in Lithos which were located near the Brim River from Palea, it is possible that the water flaw brought the baskets from Palea and they were caught or trapped in Lithos village. As baskets are light, they can be easily carried by water.
Moreover, the author claimed that the river is very deep and broad, so it was impossible to cross it. But he did not mention its past form. He did not depict any picture about the river situation in the past when Palea were lived. It is likely that this river was narrow or shallow and people could cross it easily and transfer baskets in order to sell in Lithos. It is even possible that this river was not in the past and it was generated during the time due to the floods or other natural disasters.
Furthermore, the author stated that no boats were found near the locations. It is worth mentioning that boats are made by wood and wood ruins during the time and decomposed to the soil. Thus, it is not a strong assumption to deny the absence of boats in Palea time. In addition, boats are not the only facility for crossing the river. There are numerous alternative options such as bridges which are not considered by the author.
By way of conclusion, although the author’s arguments seem right and logical, there are multitude drawbacks which must be addressed. The author should consider the river's past geological situation. Other villages alongside rivers should be explored to find more evidence about the woven baskets. By clarifying aforementioned floats, the argument would be more treatable.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, moreover, so, thus, in addition, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1547.0 2260.96107784 68% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.78947368421 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44581259551 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 204.123752495 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513931888545 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 474.3 705.55239521 67% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 57.8036887749 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.58823529412 5.70786347227 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121395876817 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0351857224762 0.0743258471296 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0377027155462 0.0701772020484 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0706056387427 0.128457276422 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368526123467 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, moreover, so, thus, in addition, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1547.0 2260.96107784 68% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.78947368421 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44581259551 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 204.123752495 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513931888545 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 474.3 705.55239521 67% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 57.8036887749 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0 119.503703932 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.58823529412 5.70786347227 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121395876817 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0351857224762 0.0743258471296 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0377027155462 0.0701772020484 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0706056387427 0.128457276422 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368526123467 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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.