Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.
The argument claims that Palean basket was not unique to Palea village due to the newly found Palean basket in Lithos village. Lithos village was located across the Brim river from Palea, and it would be impossible for Palea inhabitants to cross the river because no boat was found in Palea village, according to the arguments. For several reasons, the argument is flawed and does not provide strong reasoning to persuade the readers.
First of all, the argument only stated that there were no Palean boats found. There is one cogent explanation for that fact. It could be the Paleans experienced great famine or other catastrophic disasters that forced them to leave their land. To do so, they took all the boats they had and traveled through the river. The event of distributing the basket to Lithos might happened before the Paleans suffered from the disaster.
Let's say the Paleans indeed never invented any boats. Thus, they were never able to travel through the river. It could be that the Lithos, who approached Paleans and started to do business there. In one occasion, they traded baskets with harvest products or could be something else.
Last but not least, the Paleans or Lithos might discovered the part of Brim river that was shallow enough to be crossed over. They used that path to get through the other side, so they could stay connected. The path might be far away from the village and required long amount of walking time.
In conclusion, the arguments need more stronger evidence and conclusion to make it more persuasive and logic.
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain. 16
- "Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the numb 54
- Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice 66
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 50
- Teacher's salary should be based on student's performance 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
... Paleans suffered from the disaster. Lets say the Paleans indeed never invented a...
^^^^
Line 9, column 35, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'stronger' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: stronger
...e. In conclusion, the arguments need more stronger evidence and conclusion to make it more...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'so', 'thus', 'in conclusion', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.236301369863 0.25644967241 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.184931506849 0.15541462614 119% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0616438356164 0.0836205057962 74% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0582191780822 0.0520304965353 112% => OK
Pronouns: 0.041095890411 0.0272364105082 151% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.0890410958904 0.125424944231 71% => OK
Participles: 0.041095890411 0.0416121511921 99% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.31374612832 2.79052419416 83% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0445205479452 0.026700313972 167% => OK
Particles: 0.00342465753425 0.001811407834 189% => OK
Determiners: 0.0958904109589 0.113004496875 85% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.027397260274 0.0255425247493 107% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0102739726027 0.0127820249294 80% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1561.0 2731.13054187 57% => OK
No of words: 265.0 446.07635468 59% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.89056603774 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.57801047555 88% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.347169811321 0.378187486979 92% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.222641509434 0.287650121315 77% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.139622641509 0.208842608468 67% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0754716981132 0.135150697306 56% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.31374612832 2.79052419416 83% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 207.018472906 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.558490566038 0.469332199767 119% => OK
Word variations: 56.1899603357 52.1807786196 108% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.039408867 80% => OK
Sentence length: 16.5625 23.2022227129 71% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.1885254604 57.7814097925 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.5625 141.986410481 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5625 23.2022227129 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.375 0.724660767414 52% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 38.8266509434 51.9672348444 75% => OK
Elegance: 1.28915662651 1.8405768891 70% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.321002809285 0.441005458295 73% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.10200493867 0.135418324435 75% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0795518312408 0.0829849096947 96% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.569797975075 0.58762219726 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.169794644431 0.147661913831 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13447592195 0.193483328276 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0725825457207 0.0970749176394 75% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.327134490934 0.42659136922 77% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.124790750164 0.0774707102158 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202912926244 0.312017818177 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0651651949739 0.0698173142475 93% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.33743842365 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.82512315271 187% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 1.0 6.46551724138 15% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 6.0 2.82389162562 212% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 14.657635468 89% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
More content wanted. For issue essays, around 450 words, for argument essays, around 400 words.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.