Passage:
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.
Lecture:
None of the three people mentioned in the reading was probably the author of the Voynich manuscript.
According to the first theory, whoever wrote the Voynich manuscript thought they were conveying information so important, or so powerful that they used the special code to keep it secret. That doesn't fit what we know about Anthony Ascham. Ascham was just an ordinary physician and scientist whose books didn't contain any original ideas. For instance, the little herbal mentioned in the reading was a description of common plants based on other well-known sources. So given what we know about Ascham, his books and the kind of knowledge he had, it seems unlikely he was the author of such an elaborately coded secret document.
Second, although Edward Kelley was notoriously good at tricking people, it seems unlikely that he created the Voynich manuscript as a fake magical book to sell to some rich people. You see, the cre ator the Voynich manuscript took a lot of care to make it look like real code. The people in the 16th century were quite easy to fool, so it was not necessary to make something this complex. If Kelly wanted to create a fake for money, there's no reason he would put so much work into creating a manuscript like this, when a much simpler book would have suited his purpose just as well.
Third, we've been able to date the manuscript material using modern methods. Both the vellum pages and the ink on the pages —both the vellum and the ink are at least 400 years old. That ruled out Voynich was the author. If Voynich wanted to create a fake, maybe he could use vellum pages taken from some old manuscript, but where would he get 400 -year- old ink? So it seems the manuscript was created centuries before Voynich obtained it.
The passage and the lecture both talk about the origin of a handwritten book called Voynich manuscript. According to the passage, there are three theories about the author of the Voynich manuscript. However, the lecturer believes that none of these theories are convincing.
The first theory assumes that Anthony Ascham, a physician, and botanist, is the putative author of the Voynich manuscript because of the similarity between the illustrations of the script with those in Ascham's book. The lecturer, however, mentions that Anthony Ascham was an ordinary botanist that did not present original ideas in his books. Therefore, it is unlikely that he published such an elaborately coded manuscript to convey information.
The second theory claims that a sixteenth-century personality called Edward Kelley created this fake manuscript and sold it to nobles. The lecturer says that this theory is not reasonable. He points out that people of those days were quite easy to fool; therefore, Edward Kelley didn't have to make this much effort to make this manuscript look real and complex. He could do simpler things to reach his goal.
Finally, according to the last theory, Wilfrid M.Voynich created a modern fake script to sell it as a cryptic book. The lecturer opposes this theory by mentioning that Voynich manuscript materials such as ink and vellum pages are at least 400 years old. Thus, Wilfrid M.Voynich couldn't have faked it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 280, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... easy to fool; therefore, Edward Kelley didnt have to make this much effort to make t...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 50, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Voynich
...according to the last theory, Wilfrid M.Voynich created a modern fake script to sell it...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 271, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Voynich
...at least 400 years old. Thus, Wilfrid M.Voynich couldnt have faked it.
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 279, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
... 400 years old. Thus, Wilfrid M.Voynich couldnt have faked it.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, look, second, so, therefore, thus, at least, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => 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: 1207.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 231.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22510822511 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89854898053 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72999932418 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.580086580087 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 365.4 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.7670630005 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.8461538462 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7692307692 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.92307692308 7.06452816374 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
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: 0.224585037023 0.272083759551 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0815789789384 0.0996497079465 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0714730731644 0.0662205650399 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143794058258 0.162205337803 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0709291965118 0.0443174109184 160% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.