Woven baskets charecterized 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 form Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crosed 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 origin of ancient things is difficult to find out as it requires drastic search in various areas and requires talent to differentiate various talents/ practices. One such type of work is Palean weaving mentioned in the argument.
Since we found a very distinctive pattern of work in Palean region, it is understandable as why it was concluded to be their unique style and done by them. However, it cannot be inferred confidently after same type of art work is found in different areas.
The baskets' pattern could be of a different origin but being heavily used for employment in Palean region. For instance, we have food in India, so commonly consumed here, like samosa. it is of Chinese origin but it is almost believed to be of Indian food.
we cannot simply assume that since the river is deep, nobody could have crossed it. there might have been a brigde which has been submerged and not excavated due to the depth. Some people might have crossed the river through another way. there are fair chances that it is originated from a different village or country.
Having said that, there are also chances that the baskets were actually of Palean origin and spread to nearby villages through markets and were used to large extent since the possibility of commute cannot be totally nullified from given inferences.
Thus we cannot conclude its roots unless we find any scripts or articles which describe us about the findings and details of how and when the artwork started and spread.
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: 10 15
No. of Words: 256 350
No. of Characters: 1207 1500
No. of Different Words: 148 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.715 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.414 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 93 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 61 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 32 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 18 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.6 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.774 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.381 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.783 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.176 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 185, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...so commonly consumed here, like samosa. it is of Chinese origin but it is almost b...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: We
...lmost believed to be of Indian food. we cannot simply assume that since the riv...
^^
Line 7, column 239, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
... crossed the river through another way. there are fair chances that it is originated ...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...lly nullified from given inferences. Thus we cannot conclude its roots unless we ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, so, thus, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 16.3942115768 18% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1248.0 2260.96107784 55% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 256.0 441.139720559 58% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.875 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.56307096286 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46335446787 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 204.123752495 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.58984375 0.468620217663 126% => OK
syllable_count: 393.3 705.55239521 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.0077587265 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.0 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6923076923 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.30769230769 5.70786347227 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.169844161739 0.218282227539 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0600849935091 0.0743258471296 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0470510544074 0.0701772020484 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0785594284454 0.128457276422 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0546607406741 0.0628817314937 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.3799401198 79% => 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: 11.02 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 98.500998004 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => 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.