The reading and the lecture is about the usage of “great houses” of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico, which are three to four story large, massive settlements that contains hundreds of rooms. Further, the author of the reading believes that “great house” was utilized by the ancient society for daily life purposes. However, the lecture cast doubt on the three theories made in the article.
First, the author points out that the “great houses” were just used as residence. It is mentioned that these settlements have similarity to recent architectures of Southwest societies, such as the apartment building at Taos in New Mexico. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She says that inside of the “great houses”, there only discovered about ten fireplaces. Even though the settlements were capable to host nearly 100 families, there would be more than ten fireplaces needed.
Secondly, the author contends that the buildings were utilized as storehouses for long-lasting food supplies such as grain maize. The article note that the “great houses” would be large enough to store a great amount of supply food. Conversely, this point is challenged by the lecturer. She argues that the excavation of the Chaco buildings showed no evidence of grain maize.
Finally, the author states that the “great houses” were used for special ceremonies. The article illustrates that the large number of broken pots near Pueblo Alto are evidence that people gathered in the building for ceremonies. Furthermore, the pots were used to prepare and serve festival meal which is also documented in other Native America cultures. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that the Pueblo Alto house contains also construction materials and tools, so that such mounds were just construction trash. Moreover, the pots were probably used by the construction workers by building the houses.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he three theories made in the article. First, the author points out that the &a...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ld be more than ten fireplaces needed. Secondly, the author contends that the b...
^^^
Line 5, column 387, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ings showed no evidence of grain maize. Finally, the author states that the &apo...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1630.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43333333333 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88420218123 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533333333333 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 495.9 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.710441355 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.8823529412 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6470588235 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.94117647059 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.363318451746 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117892483531 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0583744189892 0.0662205650399 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227442290467 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0453807931329 0.0443174109184 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 53.8541721854 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.