Several theories about the person who might wrote the manuscript
The author enumerates several theories about the person who might wrote the manuscript founded by Voynich. The lecturer, however, refutes the proposed theories and offers some counterclaims to roll out the aforementioned possibilities.
First, according to the reading, the handwritten book is probably written by scientist like Antonyo Ascham, a physician of sixteenth-century, since it contains some scientific and magical topics in a complex way. Nevertheless, the professor rejects the claim by mentioning other aspects of the scientist's work. He argues that the book possesses numerous important details in a code format, but based on Ascham's book, he was an ordinary author. In other words, he did not have many original ideas in his books. For instance, A little Herbal is a usual document without any elaborate details.
Second, there is the possibility that the manuscript is actually a fake text, and it might be presented by some individuals like Kelly who were going to make money from such odd manuscripts. On the contrary, the speaker rejects the statement. He believes that it is implausible that some people prepare books with such complex structures, on the grounds that there were various easier procedures by which they could deceive others.
Third, the last probability is that the discovered book is just a new fake one which most likely created by Voynich in order to sell and get rich from it. Conversely, the lecturer disagrees with the point of view due to the fact that the document can be examined and dated conveniently, Therefore, the dating of the book indicates that it is date back to roughly four handred years ago. Furthermore, although he could find some old paper from some centuries ago, he was not able to have access to ink related to that time.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 196, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a complex way" with adverb for "complex"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ains some scientific and magical topics in a complex way. Nevertheless, the professor rejects th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 524, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ave access to ink related to that time.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, conversely, first, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, for instance, in other words, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1502.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10884353741 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88963545425 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.625850340136 0.540411800872 116% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.5251692601 49.2860985944 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.538461538 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6153846154 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4615384615 7.06452816374 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.161788874266 0.272083759551 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0688529487705 0.0996497079465 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.188452172108 0.0662205650399 285% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145518327952 0.162205337803 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.206981839986 0.0443174109184 467% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 63.6247240618 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.