Reading and Writing are both about the use of buildings of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico. More specifically, in regard to passages, the author puts forth the idea that buildings are used for residential, storage, or ceremonial functions, and supports his position by providing three arguments. However, the speaker was quick enough to point out that there are some serious flaws with the points made by author, and address, in detail, the trouble with each point in the reading text.
To begin with, the author mentions that buildings are used for residential purposes with home for hundreds of people. Nevertheless, the speaker contradicts this argument by pointing out that if hundreds of people have lived in those buildings than there need to be fireplaces which were used for cooking. Additionally, he says that there were just ten fireplaces, which were few for people living in hundreds of rooms.
Secondly, the author claims that these huge structures were used for storing food by explaining that maize which is a long-lasting crop can be stored easily in them. Yet, the speaker challenges the claim by revealing that there were no traces of spilled maize or remains of large containers used to store maize were found during excavations.
Finally, the author wraps up his argument by positing that these building were used as ceremonial centers. Moreover, in the article, he states that there huge deposits of remains of large pots found during excavations which might be discarded pots after ceremonial functions. Not surprisingly, in contrast to author's argument, the speaker says that there were other building materials such as sand, stone part of those huge heaps. He further elaborates it by saying that these huge heaps were having materials left out after building was built, and pots might be trash from construction worker's left overs.
Reading and Writing are both about the
use
of
buildings
of
Chaco
Canyon in New Mexico. More
specifically
, in regard to passages, the
author
puts forth the
idea
that
buildings
are
used
for residential, storage, or ceremonial functions, and supports his position by providing three
arguments
.
However
, the speaker was quick
enough
to point out that there are
some
serious flaws with the points made by
author
, and address, in detail, the trouble with each point in the reading text.
To
begin
with, the
author
mentions that
buildings
are
used
for residential purposes with home for hundreds of
people
.
Nevertheless
, the speaker contradicts this
argument
by pointing out that if hundreds of
people
have
lived
in those
buildings
than there need to be fireplaces which were
used
for cooking.
Additionally
, he says that there were
just
ten fireplaces, which were few for
people
living in hundreds of rooms.
Secondly
, the
author
claims that these
huge
structures were
used
for storing food by explaining that maize which is a long-lasting crop can
be stored
easily
in them.
Yet
, the speaker challenges the claim by revealing that there were no traces of spilled maize or remains of large containers
used
to store maize
were found
during excavations.
Finally
, the
author
wraps up his
argument
by positing that these
building
were
used
as ceremonial centers.
Moreover
, in the article, he states that there
huge
deposits of remains of large pots found during excavations which might
be discarded
pots after ceremonial functions. Not
surprisingly
,
in contrast
to author's
argument
, the speaker says that there were other
building
materials such as sand, stone part of those
huge
heaps. He
further
elaborates it by saying that these
huge
heaps were having materials
left
out after
building
was built
, and pots might be trash from construction worker's
left
overs.