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.
In the given reading passage, it is stated that distinctly patterned woven baskets, known as Palean baskets, were not uniquely theirs. It is supported as the so-called Palean baskets were also found in Lithos, but no boats were discovered to reach Lithos across the deep and wide Brim River. However, before this argument can be properly evaluated, three additional proofs are required.
Firstly, the depth and width of the Brim River might be shallower and narrower at that time compared to these days. The geological features are affected by countless factors from wind to waves and they can be changed gradually or even dramatically. For example, after a huge flood, new streams can be created and sometimes they grow followed by additional environmental incidents as large as to be called a river. Likewise, perhaps the configuration of Brim River might be markedly different, enough to cross without special transportations such as boats. If then, the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
Secondly, it is possible that the Palean baskets were handed to Lithos by their descendants. It is absurd to assume that the baskets made in a certain era must be handed at that time. Historically, the migrant of artifacts happened frequently especially between the 1st and the 2nd world wars. Many European countries colonized some Asian and African countries and they moved their own heritages to other areas. Similarly, the baskets can be made by Palean people and then moved far later than that time. If it is true, it makes sense no Palean boats were found around the Brim River, while the baskets are uniquely theirs. For this case, the argument does not hold water.
Thirdly, perhaps the boat of Palean was made of somewhat difficult to remain its existence. There are various materials and all of them have different properties. Woods and grasses are relatively decomposed easily, whereas plastics take several thousands years. With the lack of skills to build a boat with hard materials such as woods, it is possible the Palean people at that time made a boat with grass, which is difficult to be found any evidence in these days. Without the knowledge about what they utilized to build a boat, it cannot be concluded they did not hand the basket to Lithos. If this point is explained by other records or else, the argument will obtain strength.
To sum up, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions in drawing the conclusion. If the author considers the three aspects above and offer convincing evidence for each, then it will be possible to fully evaluate whether the so-called Palean basket is distinctively Palean’s.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 451 350
No. of Characters: 2219 1500
No. of Different Words: 243 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.608 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.92 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.616 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.609 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.995 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.652 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.264 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.264 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.05 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, likewise, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, third, thirdly, whereas, while, as to, for example, such as, it is true, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2286.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 451.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06873614191 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70515611878 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 247.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547671840355 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 704.7 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.333676522 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.3913043478 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6086956522 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.4347826087 5.70786347227 130% => 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 : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.129354782706 0.218282227539 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0378605227271 0.0743258471296 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0441705610487 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.078236613783 0.128457276422 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0474781912838 0.0628817314937 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 98.500998004 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.