Brendan the Navigator was an Irish priest who lived in the 6th century. He is most famous for embarking on a voyage in search of the mythical “Island of the Blessed.” The details of Brendan's voyage, recorded as stories in old manuscripts, suggest to some that Brendan and his crew reached North America during their voyage, becoming the first Europeans to do so Those who advance this theory support it with several arguments
First, the written stories about Brendan’s voyage seem to make references to places his crew would have visited on the way to North America Sailors in Brendan's time typically traveled from island to island to avoid the dangers of long periods on the open seas A journey from Ireland to North America would have taken Brendan to the Faroe Islands. Iceland, and Greenland before reaching the North American continent (see illustration). Places described in the stories about Brendan’s voyage share characteristics with some of those island locations.
Second, a team of researchers recently constructed a boat resembling a curragh, an old Irish boat of the type used by Brendan Curraghs had a wooden frame with cowhides stretched over it. In building the boat, the researchers used only materials and techniques available in Brendan’s time. The researchers were able to sail this boat from Ireland to North America, demonstrating that boat technology in Brendan’s time was sufficient for a journey across the Atlantic Ocean
Third, old markings that may have a connection to Brendan’s voyage have been discovered at several locations in North America Cut into rocks, these markings consist of narrow vertical lines resembling letters of ogham, an old Irish alphabet in frequent use in Brendan’s time. The resemblance of those marks to ogham has convinced some that the markings were made by members of Brendan’s crew
The passage discusses evidences that show Brendan the Navigator may have travelled to the island of the Blessed. The lecturer, on the other hand, refutes all explanations provided by the author, and finds the dobious using detailed reasons.
First, according to the reading, the stories about Brenden illustrates that he may have visited places with same properties. The lecturer, however, rejects this notion. He states that, for instance the story of cordon coat. While some believe that the ship had raised there, some other state that it may have been in another location. Moreover, there is strong possibility that the burning remains were created by the local people , rather than by volcanoes.
Secondly, the author mentions the similarity between the construction of boats in the current era with those which were constructed by Brenden, showing the existance of technology in that period. This enhances the possibility of Brenden's travel. The professor, in contrast, states that the new boats are not completely same as the old ones. Indeed, the new boats are different in shape as they are much longer than those which existed in the Brenden's age.
Finally, the author states that there are some old markings that may attribute to the Brenden voyage. The lecturer, conversely, asserts that these findings contain some pictures, which is unlikely to be painted by members of Brenden's crew. In fact, the native people of north America used these marks such as animals, sun. On the other hand, the people in the Brenden's crew only used to apply alphabetical letters.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 431, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...remains were created by the local people , rather than by volcanoes. Secondly...
^^
Line 6, column 368, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: different
...the old ones. Indeed, the new boats are different in shape as they are much longer than those whic...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, while, for instance, in contrast, in fact, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1330.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 256.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1953125 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52437735626 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58203125 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 407.7 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.2978402711 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.6666666667 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0666666667 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1333333333 7.06452816374 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0867893785867 0.272083759551 32% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0305201907729 0.0996497079465 31% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0379769100957 0.0662205650399 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0564790773703 0.162205337803 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0355469569667 0.0443174109184 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.