Recently, there has been a debate about the purpose or use of the carved stone ball, which had been found in Scotland, no one actually know the meaning or the purpose of these stones
Recently, there has been a debate about the purpose or use of the carved stone ball, which had been found in Scotland, no one actually know the meaning or the purpose of these stones, but there are many theories about their usage, the author states them in the reading passage, the professor refutes all these theories and tries to convince his students of his point of view.
First of all, the professor maintains the opposite side of view about the using of the carved stones as a weapon, he says, if they used them as a weapon, they must have a sign on them surface as other weapons, besides that, most of these stones were well preserved. So by this point, the listing negate the first theory that the author has been adopted.
Second, the professor asserts that the theory of using the carved stones as a unit in a primitive measurement system, doesn't make sense, it's right that all of them were approximately the same size, but they made from different materials, therefore, these different materials for sure have a different density, as a result, they have different weight. To state it more clearly, he asked, if the weight of some feather equals to the weight of some of stone?. By this argument, he knocks down the reading passage second theory.
Finally, the author claiming about the possibility of the stone to served a social purpose, the professor contends that this theory has two weakness points, first, most of them are too simple in shape, second, most of the high ranking people when dying, they buried all their possessions with them, while we already found a lot of these stone unburied. Thus, the listing weakened the third theory which had stated in the reading passage.
In sum, the professor explains why he doesn't trust the theories in the reading passage and proposes sufficient evidence and illustration to oppose all these theories.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Recently, there has been a debate about ...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nce his students of his point of view. First of all, the professor maintains th...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eory that the author has been adopted. Second, the professor asserts that the t...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 125, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...unit in a primitive measurement system, doesnt make sense, its right that all of them ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 447, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'some of', you should use 'the' ('some of the stone') or simply say ''some stone''.
Suggestion: some of the stone; some stone
...of some feather equals to the weight of some of stone?. By this argument, he knocks down the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...own the reading passage second theory. Finally, the author claiming about the p...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 191, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: simple
...ess points, first, most of them are too simple in shape, second, most of the high ranking peopl...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ich had stated in the reading passage. In sum, the professor explains why he do...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 45, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... In sum, the professor explains why he doesnt trust the theories in the reading passa...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, besides, but, finally, first, if, second, so, therefore, third, thus, well, while, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1548.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 322.0 270.72406181 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80745341615 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23607819155 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37213417885 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 145.348785872 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527950310559 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 472.5 419.366225166 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 35.0 21.2450331126 165% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 122.138355064 49.2860985944 248% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 172.0 110.228320801 156% => OK
Words per sentence: 35.7777777778 21.698381199 165% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.1111111111 7.06452816374 186% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 4.19205298013 215% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
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: 0.33776229755 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124028117961 0.0996497079465 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.169780304738 0.0662205650399 256% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196102427919 0.162205337803 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.202842564353 0.0443174109184 458% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 13.3589403974 143% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.41 53.8541721854 82% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.0289183223 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.21 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.66 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 25.5 10.7273730684 238% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 16.0 10.498013245 152% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.