TPO35 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.
<span style="font-size: 19.36px;">The author in the reading passage gives three possibilities to the origin of the Voynich manuscript, while the professor, in the lecture, contradicts all these assumptions by using three specific points as supports.
First, the author asserts that the manuscript is probably made by Anthony Ascham and composed in a complex secret code, the professor argues that only special documentaries are so important and so powerful that need special code to keep secret. However, Anthony Ascham is just an ordinary scientist, as his book describes the common plans based on other's well-known sources. Thus, his work is unlike to be a secret documentary.
Second, the reading passage suggests that the manuscript is a fake used to extract money by Edward Kelley, the professor opposes this view by pointing out that even though Edward Kelley has tricked people to make money, he cannot be the author for the reason that the book is carefully texted like a code. As the people in the 16th century are easy to fool, it is unnecessary to make such a complex manuscript, because simpler one could make the same effect.
Third, despite the claim in the reading passage that it is Wilfrid M. Voynich himself that creates the manuscript, the professor emphasizes that the pages in the manuscript and the ink on pages are surely from 400 years ago. Even though Wilfrid M. Voynich could get pages from other old materials, he has no assess to the old ink. The professor reckons the manuscript must be made hundreds of years before Wilfrid M. Voynich obtains it.</span><br>
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 66, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... that the manuscript is probably made by Anthony Ascham and composed in a complex...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, so, third, thus, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1350.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13307984791 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93911676853 2.5805825403 114% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558935361217 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 402.3 419.366225166 96% => 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: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.0472098402 49.2860985944 183% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.5 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9166666667 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 7.06452816374 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163455746144 0.272083759551 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0602058082405 0.0996497079465 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0383232459031 0.0662205650399 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0914792253936 0.162205337803 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0513531572861 0.0443174109184 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => 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: 12.47 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.