artifact usage found
The main topic of both the reading and the lecture is carved stones which were found at a number of places in Scotland.
The article states that archeologists do not have an agreement about the purposes and meanings of these artifacts, and it provides three discriminating theories for making clear the reason for their use. However, in the lecture, the professor refutes the idea presented in the passage by giving examples and clarifying the weaknesses that the idea has. She says that these theories are unconvincing.
First, the passage posits that these carved stones are used as a weapon in hunting or fighting. In contrast, the professor rejects this point by saying that past weapons had weird signs, whereas this stone had a simple sign. Additionally, in her opinion, most of the past potteries had a crack, hollow, or broken part, and a hollow can't be a convincing reason for the theory.
Second, the reading says that maybe stone balls were utilizing as a system of calculating the weight of things. Nevertheless, the lecturer denies this, suggesting that these carved stones don't have a uniform size. Moreover, they made from various materials like sand and grind. Besides, they have different density: which means two same size particles have different weights.
Third, according to the article's other hypothesis, they have been used for social purposes, not practical reasons. The speaker doesn't agree with this point of view. She asserts that using these artifacts as a social purpose is unlikely. She explains that most of social signs have an intricate pattern, while carved ballons are simple. She used another evidence for approving her opinion: these signs were used for identifying people's position or ranking, and therefore pottery was using just by important persons. On the other hand, No one found this type of artifact near the gravies, and lack of this stuffs close those places shows that they were not a social clue.
In conclusion, the points made in the lecture contradicts the central standpoint of the reading. Having decrepit and erosion effects on the old things, being ununiform, and having a simple pattern with no evidence of this stuffs adjacent to the graves mentioned in the lecture demonstrate that the reading opinion about carved stones is in doubt.
- Agree or not agree with the following statement? 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. 73
- artifact 3
- tpo31-1 80
- Do you agree or disagree with this statement? The world is changing so quickly, people now are less happy or less satisfied with their lives than people were in the past. 70
- artifact usage found 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 196, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...t past weapons had weird signs, whereas this stone had a simple sign. Additionally, ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 333, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...k, hollow, or broken part, and a hollow cant be a convincing reason for the theory. ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 189, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...is, suggesting that these carved stones dont have a uniform size. Moreover, they mad...
^^^^
Line 9, column 128, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ses, not practical reasons. The speaker doesnt agree with this point of view. She asse...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 303, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... social signs have an intricate pattern, while carved ballons are simple. She use...
^^
Line 9, column 338, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...tern, while carved ballons are simple. She used another evidence for approving her...
^^^
Line 9, column 601, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
... artifact near the gravies, and lack of this stuffs close those places shows that th...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, whereas, while, in conclusion, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1927.0 1373.03311258 140% => OK
No of words: 377.0 270.72406181 139% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11140583554 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55396208187 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 145.348785872 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554376657825 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 579.6 419.366225166 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.51434878587 396% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.5812201691 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.421052632 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8421052632 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.84210526316 7.06452816374 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.09492273731 147% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => 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: 0.0548583644825 0.272083759551 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0187289948582 0.0996497079465 19% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0445268647981 0.0662205650399 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.029142505714 0.162205337803 18% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0412144238501 0.0443174109184 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => 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: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 63.6247240618 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.