Voynich manuscript
The reading and the lecture are both about the accuracy of an ancient manuscript called "Voynich manuscript", which was acquired by a bookseller. The author discusses three theories in order to reject the veracity of this manuscript. On the other hand, the professor is not convinced of this, and casts doubt on each of the theories presented in the reading. Point to the other side of the story, he is of the opinion that any of each persons mentioned in the passage can not be the author of the book through the following truths.
Firstly, the author argues that the book is an actual work of a magical or scientific work, and Anthony Ascham is the probable author of it. This specific argument is challenged by the lecture. According to the professor, the person who is mentioned in the reading as the probable author does not possess any original idea. Also, Ascham has not ever presented any original and personal book or knowledge. Furthermore, the professor asserts that the herbal depicted by Ascham are also gained form other sources.
Secondly, the author disputes that this manuscript is fake and the passages are meaningless. Additionally, the reading provides an example of Kelly to illustrates this notion. Kelly had created a manuscript utilizing made-up alphabets and random orders, and since his book looked magical the wealthy people of that time were willing to pay money for it. In contrast, the lecture opposes the viewpoint by asserting that this book is accurately organized. However, noble people at that time were not genuine enough to comprehend the complexity of the book and they hardly could recognized fake material. Since many accuracy and work had been put for this book, the second theory can not be verified.
Finally, the author averts that Voynich himself can be that author of book in order to acquire money from affluent people. Since Voynich was a book dealer, he was totally familiar with ancient books. The lecturer's stance is that the books material, the ink and the paper, has been dated by modern methods to 4000 years ago. Therefore, even Voynich could find old paper for his work, little in no way he could find a 4000 years old ink.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 577, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'recognize'
Suggestion: recognize
...exity of the book and they hardly could recognized fake material. Since many accuracy and ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 609, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[2]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun accuracy seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much accuracy', 'a good deal of accuracy'.
Suggestion: much accuracy; a good deal of accuracy
...y could recognized fake material. Since many accuracy and work had been put for this book, th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 205, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...otally familiar with ancient books. The lecturers stance is that the books material, the ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 335, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rn methods to 4000 years ago. Therefore, even Voynich could find old paper for hi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, as to, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 10.4613686534 210% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => 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: 1828.0 1373.03311258 133% => OK
No of words: 371.0 270.72406181 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92722371968 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60876620338 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 145.348785872 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.504043126685 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 562.5 419.366225166 134% => 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: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.9277728847 49.2860985944 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.2105263158 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5263157895 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.181885078696 0.272083759551 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0538487864956 0.0996497079465 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0880561143047 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112715986054 0.162205337803 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0890939926615 0.0443174109184 201% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 63.6247240618 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.