The passage gives three competing theories of what the massive stone buildings located in the American Southwest were used for. However, the lecture claims that none of them is well-supported by evidence.
First of all, the passage argues that the Chaco buildings were used as residents housing hundreds of people, which indicates the houses were the earlier versions of the recent Southwest architectures, for the houses were extremely similar to the apartments buildings at Tao where have been residents for centuries. The lecture resists that although the buildings looked like houses, the layout inside didn’t make the assumption convincing. There weren’t enough fire places which were necessary for daily cook. Only 10 fire places were found in a building which was supposed to contain one hundred people.
Secondly, the passage states that the Chaco buildings were used as storages for food supplies, especially for grain maize. Grain maize was one of the main corps of Chaco people and can be stored for long times. The size of the great house was quite suitable for the supplies of maize to store. This claim is not in line with that of the lecture, which suggests that this assumption is also not well-supported, for the trace of maize or the containers were not found in the houses. Chaco people would not just split maize on the ground.
Last, the passage asserts that the great houses were used as ceremonial centers. A large number of pots were excavated close to one house, indicating this house is used for special ceremonies. These pots were where the meals were prepared or served at the ceremonies which were seen in other native American cultures. Nevertheless, the lecture contends that near the house where the pots were found, there were many other materials like constructive materials. Those materials could be the trash which Chaco people left behind.
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
'were used as' is repeated a lot of times.
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 25 in 30
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 12
No. of Words: 311 250
No. of Characters: 1534 1200
No. of Different Words: 156 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.199 4.2
Average Word Length: 4.932 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.418 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 97 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 71 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 51 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 33 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.438 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.434 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.312 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.361 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.551 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.113 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 82, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: Many; Numerous
...houses were used as ceremonial centers. A large number of pots were excavated close to one house,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, look, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, well, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 10.4613686534 239% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1589.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 309.0 270.72406181 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14239482201 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55495418147 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527508090615 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 486.9 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.5552433733 49.2860985944 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.3125 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3125 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.125 7.06452816374 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.53359983875 0.272083759551 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.180890954611 0.0996497079465 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0877844577064 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.318704477709 0.162205337803 196% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0770036754142 0.0443174109184 174% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.