In 1912 a bookseller named Wilfrid M. Voynich acquired a beautifully illustrated handwritten book (manuscript) written on vellum (vellum is a material that was used for writing before the introduction of paper). The “Voynich manuscript,” as it became known, resembles manuscripts written in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. However, it is written in a completely unknown script. To date, no one has been able to decode the script and understand the book’s content. Several theories have been proposed to explain the origin of the Voynich manuscript.
One theory is that the manuscript is a genuine work on some scientific or magical subject composed in a complex secret code. Anthony Ascham, a sixteenth-century physician and botanist, has been identified as a possible author, since many plant illustrations in the Voynich manuscript are quite similar to those in Ascham’s book on medicinal plants, A Little Herbal, published in 1550.
According to some other theories, the manuscript is really a fake and its text has no real meaning. For example, it has been proposed the manuscript was created by Edward Kelley, a sixteenth-century personality who extracted money from nobles across Europe by pretending to have magical powers. Kelley may have created the manuscript as a fake magical book to sell to a wealthy noble. He used a made-up alphabet in a completely random order. It looks like a book of magical secrets, but there is no meaningful underlying text.
Another theory is that the manuscript is actually a modern fake created by Wilfrid M. Voynich himself. As an antique book dealer, Voynich certainly had the knowledge of what old manuscripts should look like and could have created a fake one. Perhaps Voynich’s plan was to sell the fake as a mysterious old book if he received an attractive offer.
Both the reading passage and the lecture discuss about the possible origin of the the Voynich manuscript. The passage proposes three theories to explain the origin of the manuscript. However, the professor in the lecture casts doubt on all the theories mentioned in the passage.
First of all, the passage claims that the manuscript is a genuine work on some scientific or magical subject composed in a complex secret code, and Antony Ascham was the possible author, since many plant illustrations in the Voynich manuscript are similar to those in Ascham's book, A Little Herbal. Nevertheless, the professor denies the passage by arguing that those plants in the manuscript and Ascham's book are quite common in the world. Thus, this theory is not convincing.
Secondly, the passage mentions that the manuscript could be a fake and meaningless, and the possible author was Edward Kelly, since he was a man who scammed nobles by pretending to have magical powers. Notwithstanding, the professor disagrees with the passage. Instead, he points out that the manuscript took lots of effort to finished, yet people in sixteenth-century were easy to fool. In this sense, why Edward needed to put that much efforts to fake it?
Finally, the passage suggests that the manuscript is actually a modern fake created by Wilfrid M. Voynich himself. Since he is an antique book dealer, he certainly had the knowledge of what old manuscripts should look like and could have created a fake one. However, the professor refutes the passage by mentioning that modern examination has dated the material and the ink of the manuscript, and the result indicated that both of them are older than 400 years old. Although Voynich could have used other old manuscripts' paper, he could not fake 400 years old ink.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 79, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...re discuss about the possible origin of the the Voynich manuscript. The passage propose...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 79, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...re discuss about the possible origin of the the Voynich manuscript. The passage propose...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 434, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...is sense, why Edward needed to put that much efforts to fake it? Finally, the pas...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, however, if, look, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, thus, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1498.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 296.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06081081081 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74843072298 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527027027027 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 450.9 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.6207397928 49.2860985944 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.0 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1428571429 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.07142857143 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19514924034 0.272083759551 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0701727102565 0.0996497079465 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0526055357812 0.0662205650399 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117925521079 0.162205337803 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0358513593006 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.