In the lecture, the professor casts doubts on the analysis of functions of the clay jars as batteries.
To begin with, the speaker rules out the argument in the passage that metal wires, which is essential for the use of battery, were not discovered. Since the vessels were found by local people instead of professional archaeologists, it is highly likely that the metal wires were ignored or thrown away.
Secondly, lecturer asserts that the similarity between copper cylinders in the jars and those from Seleucia does not necessarily indicate that they can not be used as batteries. It is reasonable to believe that these vessels were originally devised as holding structures, but was later discovered by accident to function as power source.
Last, although in ancient time devices using electricity were scarce, as argued in the passage, the speaker claims that the phenomenon of electricity can either be used as a manifestation of magic power or as treating methods by doctors. So it is not totally useless as the passage says.
To conclude, based on the reasons given by the professor, the ancient vessel might well serve as a battery, and the discussions in the passage are not that plausible.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, second, secondly, so, well, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1014.0 1373.03311258 74% => OK
No of words: 200.0 270.72406181 74% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.76060309309 4.04702891845 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7964084108 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 145.348785872 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.595 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 324.0 419.366225166 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.4289558517 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.75 110.228320801 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 21.698381199 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.351573103265 0.272083759551 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122890977944 0.0996497079465 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0657815536176 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155091877627 0.162205337803 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0785783380433 0.0443174109184 177% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 53.8541721854 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.