TPO 35 Integrated ٌWritingIn 1912 a bookseller named Wilfrid M. Voynich acquired a beautifully illustrated handwritten book (manuscript) written on vellum
The reading discusses several theories about content and possible authors of a manuscript which was highly encoded into strange words. However, the lecturer finds the ideas dubious and casts doubt on each theory proposed by the reading passage.
First, the author argues that the book may have been about some scientific issues provided by Anthony Ascham, a physician and botanist. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that although some material of manuscript were similar to Antony's book, it did not need to be such complex because that kinds of content were in every other famous source. Therefore it is highly unlikely that the writer of the manuscript was him.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that the handwritten book was fake with no real purpose written by Kelley, who used to extract money from wealthy ones by deceiving them about his magical power. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that the people of that time were so stupid and foolish that it did not need such an effort to defraud them. So it is not reasonable that Kelly may have put words so precisely together.
Finally, the reading passage asserts that it may be a modern fake provided by Voynich himself to sell it as a mysterious and valuable book. In contrast, the speaker dismisses the issue due to the fact that while he was familiar with old books, he might have been able to provide some old volumes, but he could not provide the ink which was for four hundred years before. As a result, this theory also will be excluded due to its erroneous assumption.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 353, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...tent were in every other famous source. Therefore it is highly unlikely that the writer o...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, therefore, while, as for, in contrast, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => 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: 1311.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 271.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83763837638 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40419992621 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59778597786 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 403.2 419.366225166 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.9445690401 49.2860985944 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.181818182 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6363636364 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.8181818182 7.06452816374 181% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0731973765408 0.272083759551 27% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.027570750411 0.0996497079465 28% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0279137860476 0.0662205650399 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0423692941035 0.162205337803 26% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.018547508645 0.0443174109184 42% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.