TPO-30 - Integrated Writing Task A little over 2,200 years ago, the Roman navy attacked the Greek port city of Syracuse. According to some ancient historians, the Greeks defended themselves with an ingenious weapon called a "burning mirror": a polished co

It is believed that the concept of burning mirror, that the Greeks used to defend themselves against roman attack, might have been a myth and several reasons are given to support the argument. But there are other possible explanations that credit the feasibility and advantages of this concept. The reasons are discussed further.

To begin with, the Greeks may not have needed the capability of manufacturing a large parabolic mirror, instead they could have achieved it using small mirrors. Thus eradicating the need of single wide sheet of copper. And the Greeks were abreast of knowledge they needed to arrange these mirrors so as to concentrate the heat from sunlight on one point.

In addition, the argument that these mirror would have taken a considerable amount of time to set wood on fire condones the fact that ship is constructed using other materials also. The glue know as Pitch that was used for water proofing and holding the wood together was capable of catching fire in seconds when subjected to such amounts of concentrated heat. The Greeks would have used their mirror to heat up this glue which in turn light up the wood.

Furthermore, Roman soldiers would have been aware of these flaming arrows. They would have arranged for setting off the fire caused by this arrows. However, it would have not been possible for the Roman soldiers to block the heat from burning mirrors. Therefore, it would have been an effective weapon against the Roman ships.

Conclusively, for the above reasons it was both advantageous and feasible for Greeks to use burning mirrors to defend themselves against the Roman invasion.

Votes
Average: 8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 298, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...ge they needed to arrange these mirrors so as to concentrate the heat from sunlight on o...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 177, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...ip is constructed using other materials also. The glue know as Pitch that was used f...
^^^^
Line 7, column 136, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...nged for setting off the fire caused by this arrows. However, it would have not been...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, may, second, so, therefore, thus, as to, in addition, 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: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => 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: 1368.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02941176471 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5261607014 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533088235294 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 414.9 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5119033307 49.2860985944 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.7142857143 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4285714286 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.14285714286 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.439746301537 0.272083759551 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.154059431611 0.0996497079465 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0823318242274 0.0662205650399 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.23416329626 0.162205337803 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0515268734953 0.0443174109184 116% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => 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.