Based on the reading materials, it is stated that there are 3 viable hypotheses regarding explanation of the origin of the Voynich manuscript. However, the author finds this idea bereft of sufficient reasoning and presents some ideas to the contrary.
Initially, the author argued that Anthony Ascham, who was a 16-century physician and botanist, has been identified as the author of the manuscript and wrote it based on coded alphabet owing to the fact that it was a genuine scientific work. That being said, the lecturer repudiated this idea by clarifying that Anthony Ascham was not a genius physician and the context of the book, which is about the medicinal plants, A little Herbal, was based on well-known sources and as a result, it is unlikely that he was the author of the manuscript.
Another point mentioned by the author was that the context of the manuscript has no meaning and the author is probably Edward Kelley, who tried to extract money from nobles across the Europe by pretending that to have magical powers. However, the lecturer rejected this one too by stating that the 16-century people were not so smart to distinguish the differences between the original manuscript and the fake one. Edward Kelley must have spended to much money in order to make this fake manuscript, which is unreasonable owing to the fact that he could extract money from nobles much easier.
The final point advanced in the reading passage was that Wilfrid M. Voynich created a modern fake manuscript in order to sell the fake as a mysterious old book. Yet again, the professor casted doubt on this idea. He said that this theory is unlikely too owing to the fact that ink, which was used in the original manuscript is for 400 years ago and it would be impossible for Wifrid to find the ink like this in order to write a fake one, so the manuscript was definitely was for centuries ago.
- TPO-48 - Integrated Writing Task In recent years, many frog species around the world have declined in numbers or even gone extinct due to changes in their environment. These population declines and extinctions have serious consequences for the ecosystems 85
- TPO-28 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Parents today are more involved in their children’s education than were parents in the past.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 60
- TPO-30 - Integrated Writing Task A little over 2,200 years ago, the Roman navy attacked the Greek port city of Syracuse. According to some ancient historians, the Greeks defended themselves with an ingenious weapon called a "burning mirror": a polished co 86
- TPO-43 - Independent Writing Task Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?-Interrupt and correct the mistake right away-Wa 90
- Because the world is changing so quickly, people now are less happy or less satisfied with their lives than people were in the past. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 447, Rule ID: TO_TOO[2]
Message: Did you mean 'too'?
Suggestion: too
...ke one. Edward Kelley must have spended to much money in order to make this fake m...
^^
Line 4, column 472, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...e one, so the manuscript was definitely was for centuries ago.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, regarding, so, well, as for, as to, as a result
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: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => 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: 1560.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 327.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.77064220183 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56710297325 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489296636086 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 487.8 419.366225166 116% => 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: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 81.9345636912 49.2860985944 166% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.818181818 110.228320801 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.7272727273 21.698381199 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.45454545455 7.06452816374 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0130602453424 0.272083759551 5% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00380061953885 0.0996497079465 4% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0120186142625 0.0662205650399 18% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0077830374158 0.162205337803 5% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0134806162414 0.0443174109184 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.3589403974 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 53.8541721854 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.98 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.99 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.