tpo integrated 30
The lecture and the reading both discuss a weapon called burning mirror. While the reading states that the burning mirror is a myth and the Greek never build this device, the reading enumerates three reasons to support that. The lecture refutes this point saying that the reasons mentioned in the reading in unconvincing and the professor explain that the Greek build that device.
First of all, the reading claims that the Greeks were not technologically advanced to make such device. The device should have a precise prabolic, such specification did not exist in the ancient. However, the lecture argues that the there was no need to had a large sheet of copper to build the burning mirror. According to the professor, the Greek were able to assemble small copper pieces together and form the parabolic shape to build the burning mirror.
In addition, the reading makes an argument that the burning mirror took long time to set the ship on fire. It is impracticable and ineffective for the Greek to make this device. The lecture counters this point by saying that it took about 10 minutes for the wood of the ship to set on fire, but the boats were also made of other materials. Furthermore, a sticky substance called bitch used to seal the space between woods was flammable. Bitch catches fire so quickly, it took only 1 second to set fire for the whole boat. The burning mirrors were effective.
Lastly, the reading passage argues that the burning mirror does not seem an improvement that the Greek had. The Greek already had a similar device called flaming arrow which worked in the same way like burning mirror. The lecture refutes this point by saying that the flaming arrow was familiar to the Roman. However, the burning mirror only looks like a mirror. Moreover, the professor says that the burning mirror will be much effective and more surprising to the roman. The burning mirrors suddenly burn.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 459, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...olic shape to build the burning mirror. In addition, the reading makes an argume...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, look, moreover, second, so, while, in addition, first of all, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1604.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 327.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90519877676 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36763615852 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.470948012232 0.540411800872 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 479.7 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 17.0 8.23620309051 206% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.151497174 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.4210526316 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2105263158 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.78947368421 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.488570797352 0.272083759551 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.175871246894 0.0996497079465 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0784126641113 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.304527500824 0.162205337803 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0775758540066 0.0443174109184 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 13.3589403974 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.9 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.33 8.42419426049 87% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.