Товарищи, помогите, пожалуйста, с эссе по Analytical writing.
Правильно ли я понимаю argument, evidence и assumption?
Верно ли употребляю слова?
Насколько релевантны мои аргументы?
Ответила ли я в соответствии с заданием?
Пунктуация - совсем ж*па?
Что поправить?
Задание:
- 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.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
Мой ответ:
The author of the memo contends that “Palean baskets” were not originally Palean. To justify this argument, he provides the evidence that these baskets were also discovered in Lithos. Palean people had no possibility to get to this place, because the two villages were separated by a deep and broad river, and no Palean boats have ever been found. The argument relies on an unstated assumption that there were no ways for baskets produced in Palea to appear in Lithos. However the evidence provided by the author is not enough to make his argument cogent. He fails to consider such possibilities as changes in relief of that place and bringing the baskets from Palea by Lithos people. These and other flaws in reasoning make the argument misleading.
First, the fact that no Palean boats have been found does not actually mean that Palean people had no boats as well as other ways of transportation. For example, the scientists could not find the evidence of Higgs boson for a long time, but recently it was found. May be discovering these boats is just a question of time?
Moreover, even if the author’s assumption that Palean people had no possibility to get Lithos is true, he fails to mention any facts of possibilities for Lithos people to float to Palea. If they had boats, they might visit Palea and bring the baskets to their village. That would seriously weaken the author’s point. It is impossible to adequately evaluate the argument without this information.
Additionally, the writer describes river as “deep and broad” as it is now to support his evidence of impossibility for Palean people to come to Lithos . Nevertheless it is well-known that river channel may change over time for many reasons such as erosion, drought or rainfalls. What if the Brim River was not deep and broad or did not existed at all in the era of Palean civilization? In order to strengthen his point, the author must provide conclusive evidence of that fact that the Brim River was as deep and broad as it is now.
The author not necessarily be wrong that “Palea” baskets were not uniquely Palean, but to make his argument more persuasive, he must provide more convincing evidence of his assumptions. Without clarifying the questions such as “Could other civilizations come to Palea?” or “What the Brim River looked like during era of Palea?” as well as without undeniable proofs that Palean people did not used boats, it is difficult to assess the memo as a persuasive one.
