The passage and lecture are arguing about the function of the carved stone balls.
The passage and lecture are arguing about the function of the carved stone balls. QLMDK
The passage and lecture are arguing about the function of the carved stone balls. The author lists out three possible theories to explain this matter. On the contrary, the lecturer believes that all these theories are unconvincing and she challenges proposed theories one by one.
First, the passage author mentions that, these stone objects were used for fighting and hunting. In contrast, the lecturer refuses this point and she states that the other weapons like arrows had sing for hunting while there is no sign on these stones. Therefore, these objects were not used as weapons.
Second, the passage states another theory; these stone objects were used for system of weight. The lecturer, however, holds an opposing view and she asserts that these stone objects were not proper for using system of weight, since they are made of different stones. In better words, although these stone objects are the same shape, they have different weight since they are made of different stone with different densities. Therefore, these the same shaped stones were not the same weight which is improtant for system of weight.
Finally, based on the passage, these stone objects had had a social purpose. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts this theory and she points out the disigns of these stones were too simple for using as social marked. Furthermore, there was a custom that, when a person died her/his social mark was buried with her/him, while none of these object have been found in tomb or graves. Hence, these object were not uses as social marks.
The
passage
and lecture are arguing about the function of the carved
stone
balls. The author lists out three possible
theories
to
explain
this matter.
On the contrary
, the
lecturer
believes that all these
theories
are
unconvincing and
she challenges proposed
theories
one by one.
First
, the
passage
author mentions that, these
stone
objects
were
used
for fighting and hunting.
In contrast
, the
lecturer
refuses this
point and
she states that the other weapons like arrows had
sing
for hunting while there is no
sign
on these
stones
.
Therefore
, these
objects
were not
used
as weapons.
Second, the
passage
states another
theory
; these
stone
objects
were
used
for system of
weight
. The
lecturer
,
however
, holds an opposing
view and
she asserts that these
stone
objects
were not proper for using system of
weight
, since they
are made
of
different
stones
. In better words, although these
stone
objects
are the same shape, they have
different
weight
since they
are made
of
different
stone
with
different
densities.
Therefore
, these the same shaped
stones
were not the same
weight
which is
improtant
for system of weight.
Finally
, based on the
passage
, these
stone
objects
had had a
social
purpose.
On the other hand
, the
lecturer
rebuts this
theory and
she points out the
disigns
of these
stones
were too simple for using as
social
marked.
Furthermore
, there was a custom that, when a person
died
her/his
social
mark
was buried
with her/him, while none of these
object
have
been found
in tomb or graves.
Hence
, these
object
were not
uses
as
social
marks.