TPO 30
In the reading passage, the author claims that there are three viable explanations for refuting applying a burning mirror, which was an ancient Greek weapon used 2200 years ago, when they were in the war with Roman. However, finding all the ideas implausible and questionable the professor casts doubt on what is presented in the text, and believes that all of the points mentioned in the reading are unconvincing; therefore, he states some evidence to the contrary.
At first, the author argues that the Greeks knowledge, in that era, had not progressed enough to generate such a developed tool since not only did it require a wide polished copper but it also would have to be manufactured accurately. Conversely, the lecturer points out that an experiment has demonstrated that attaching some small flats of polished coppers which constituted the shape of the parabola were capable to set such fire. According to this issue that Greek had the adequate mathematical knowledge to form the parabolic shape from small pieces of the copper; they were technically enable to produce a burning mirror.
In addition, the reading passage holds the view that setting up such fire necessitated the Romans' ships to remain immobile for approximately 30 minutes which is absolutely infeasible idea. On the other hand, the professor dismisses this idea by clarifying the fact that this would be true if the Romans' ships had been entirely created from the wood. Indeed, a substance called pitch were utilized to make the Romans' ships water proof which quickly got fired by a burning mirror and this flam would have easily scattered into the woody parts of the ships even when it was moving.
Finally, the author asserts that there is not any justification for constituting the burning mirror with flaming arrows, as another Greek's weapon which was rather prevalent in that period. The professor, thought, disputes this idea by subscribing the fact that the Roman's force got utterly acquainted with the presence of such device by the Greek army. Therefore, having used another weapon, Greeks not only surprised Romans, but also this approach was far more efficient. Indeed, flaming arrows' fire was easily noticeable while the fire were coming from the new device was hidden at the first glance and suddenly got appeared after starting the fire.
- When teachers assign projects on which students must work together, the students learn much more effectively than when they are asked to work alone on projects. 80
- Do you agree or disagree? Rather than help children with their schoolwork, parents shouldencourage their children do their work independently. 90
- TPO 21 85
- A/D: Parents should give school-age children money as reward for getting a high mark in their schools. 70
- TPO 27 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 355, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...resented in the text, and believes that all of the points mentioned in the reading are unc...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 592, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'enabled'.
Suggestion: enabled
...es of the copper; they were technically enable to produce a burning mirror. In additi...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 422, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: waterproof
... were utilized to make the Romans ships water proof which quickly got fired by a burning mi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, so, therefore, while, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1951.0 1373.03311258 142% => OK
No of words: 383.0 270.72406181 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09399477807 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58533371124 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 145.348785872 147% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558746736292 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 606.6 419.366225166 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 34.6454261852 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 162.583333333 110.228320801 147% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.9166666667 21.698381199 147% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => 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 : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.421650914021 0.272083759551 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.146147016599 0.0996497079465 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0633608786472 0.0662205650399 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.24569887116 0.162205337803 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0496451806246 0.0443174109184 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 13.3589403974 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.01 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.0289183223 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.46 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 63.6247240618 163% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 10.7273730684 172% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.2008830022 170% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.