Carved stone balls purposes
The reading passage explores the purpose of carved stone balls found in Scotland and several theories are given in support of this statement. Although these points seem reasonable, the professor in the lecture casts doubt on them, finding them not convincing for the following reasons.
To begin with, the author of the article proposes that stone balls can be utilized as hunting weapons. Since there are holes and grooves on balls, the cords can be attached to the balls and become weapons. Conversely, disputing the author’s argument, the lecturer details that the balls were well preserved and undamaged which contradicts the general circumstances of weapons that most of them will have cracks or break into pieces. Therefore, the lecturer believes that the carved stone balls have nothing to do with weapons.
Second, even though the author claims that the balls can be served as a standard measuring system because of their uniform size, the lecturer argues that it is a misconception. This is because the balls were composed of different types of stones causing them to vary drastically in masses. Accordingly, the lecturer states that the balls can’t be practical and accurate in the weighting systems.
Last but not least, the lecturer acutely identifies a weakness in the passage that the elaborately designed balls probably represent social status. She points out that, in fact, most patterns of balls are so simple that they were unlikely to show special status. Furthermore, in an attempt to establish a more concrete explanation, the lecturer cites ancient people’s tombs as proof. She indicates that people were usually buried with their personal possessions when they died. Nevertheless, none of the balls have been discovered in graves. As a result, the lecturer dismisses this theory.
To summarize, both the author and the lecturer hold conflicting views about the purposes of the carved stone balls.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-31 | reza_fattahi | 83 | view |
| 2023-01-20 | nikki07hung | 85 | view |
| 2022-12-25 | nikki07hung | 85 | view |
| 2022-12-02 | lilipo | 80 | view |
| 2022-10-26 | _sta | 80 | view |
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, conversely, furthermore, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, well, in fact, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1624.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 308.0 270.72406181 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27272727273 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66179120144 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577922077922 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 486.0 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3247428909 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.5 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.25 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.8125 7.06452816374 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.353559088019 0.272083759551 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117596299907 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.117198076844 0.0662205650399 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210343193249 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0749195550819 0.0443174109184 169% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.19 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 63.6247240618 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, conversely, furthermore, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, well, in fact, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1624.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 308.0 270.72406181 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27272727273 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66179120144 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577922077922 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 486.0 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3247428909 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.5 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.25 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.8125 7.06452816374 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.353559088019 0.272083759551 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117596299907 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.117198076844 0.0662205650399 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210343193249 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0749195550819 0.0443174109184 169% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.19 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 63.6247240618 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.