The reading and the lecture are about the discovery of a set of clay jars and the possibility that they were used to generate electricity. The reading rejects the hypothesis that these jars were used for producing electricity, however, the lecture says that the reasons mentioned by the author of the reading are not convincing.
First, the article argues that there were not wires or conductors found with the jars which eliminate the notion that these jars used as a source of power, in contrast, the professor refutes this opinion by drawing the attention to the fact that the jars were discovered by normal people, not by archaeologists. Hence, it is possible that wires or conductors have been thrown away because people thought they were not important.
Second, the text contends that the copper cylinders inside the jarlook were just like the copper cylinders discovered in Seleucia used for holding the scrolls. The professor, on the other hand, says that it is possible that the ancient people discovered a second usage for these cylinders. She elaborates that they could adapted these cylinders to generate electricity by filling the copper cylinders with certain liquid.
Third, The author of the reading casts doubts about the motive of old people to produce electricity since they did not have any devices that need electricity at that time. The lecturer, however, rebuts this statement by providing a logical explanation. She suggests that the ancient people may have other usage for it, or they may just felt the power shock. It could be used in medicine to improve sensation or maybe some of them used it a magical or secret power to impress people of that time.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 110, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[5]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'used to generating'.
Suggestion: used to generating
...jars and the possibility that they were used to generate electricity. The reading rejects the h...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 151, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sed to generate electricity. The reading rejects the hypothesis that these jars w...
^^
Line 6, column 322, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'adapt'
Suggestion: adapt
...linders. She elaborates that they could adapted these cylinders to generate electricity...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, look, may, second, so, third, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 22.412803532 152% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1411.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 281.0 270.72406181 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02135231317 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5711540592 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.487544483986 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 448.2 419.366225166 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 58.236763828 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.272727273 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5454545455 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.404318182132 0.272083759551 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148854595564 0.0996497079465 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0785516612237 0.0662205650399 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234342146247 0.162205337803 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0523862020514 0.0443174109184 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 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: 12.13 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 10.7273730684 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.