Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could be used only for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this discovery, collectors predict that the life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures increase in value.
The argument states the archeological discoveries about two distinct Kalinese statue forms. The argument tries to explain the process Kalinese artists might have used to sculpt these statues by reporting findings about the different tools and techniques that might have been used. The argument concludes by citing a prediction that comments on the monetary value of the two types of sculptures. However, the conclusion might be fallacious as it depends on many unchecked assumptions.
Firstly, the author concludes that the life-size clay human figures were made using the molds of human hands and heads found on Kali island. However, it might be the case that the molds were used to build a rough structure over which the artisans might have used sculpting techniques to carve out the details.
Secondly, the difference in detail between the small and large sized structures might be attributed to different time periods. It can be possible that the Kali people developed the art of making life-size human statues over a long period of time. So the smaller statues might have been made when the art was in its nascent form. Thus it would be invalid to compare both the statues.
In addition to that, the difference in style between the miniature and large statues could be attributed to the fact that different genres of art might have existed on Kali Island over different time periods. Lastly, the collector's predictions about the value of both forms of art might not hold true in all cases as it immensely depends on the preferences of the person determining the value. Some might find the miniature statues more aesthetically pleasing that the life-sized ones and vice versa.
In conclusion, the examples discussed hamper the arguments ability to withstand dissent and doubt. If the author might have provided more evidence about the art form that might have been documented in Kali literature, his/her conclusions might have been more pleasing. Regarding the value of the statues, an expert opinion on their true value could have bolstered the argument further.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-05 | Technoblade | 71 | view |
| 2023-02-25 | tedyang777 | 60 | view |
| 2022-10-19 | asingh1003 | 59 | view |
| 2022-06-19 | Pri_Judy | 50 | view |
| 2021-10-23 | amyabt | 58 | view |
- Every individual in a society has the responsibility to obey laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws 62
- In survey s Mason City residents rank water sports swimming boating and fishing among their favourite recreational activities The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits however and the city park department devotes little of 53
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely decrease 83
- Collectors prize the ancient life size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 339 350
No. of Characters: 1701 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.291 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.018 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.549 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 111 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.188 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.56 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.688 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.353 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.586 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.072 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 282, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...d techniques that might have been used. The argument concludes by citing a predicti...
^^^
Line 5, column 232, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ing life-size human statues over a long period of time. So the smaller statues might have been...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 330, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e when the art was in its nascent form. Thus it would be invalid to compare both the...
^^^^
Line 9, column 50, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguments'' or 'argument's'?
Suggestion: arguments'; argument's
...sion, the examples discussed hamper the arguments ability to withstand dissent and doubt....
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, regarding, second, secondly, so, thus, in addition, in conclusion, in all cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1742.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 338.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15384615385 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60527780235 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505917159763 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 537.3 705.55239521 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.7214817159 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.875 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.125 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5625 5.70786347227 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216832148634 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0759294534605 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0863789145349 0.0701772020484 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136851302394 0.128457276422 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0632448639027 0.0628817314937 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 98.500998004 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 Out of 6
---------------------
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.