Chaco Canion great houses
The Reading and the lecture argued about the theories of how the great houses of the Chaco Canyon people considered great houses for thier big size and hight building and been used as residential, food storage or maybe as ceremonial centers. The three theories presented in the reading has been questioned by the lecture.
First, the reading said these houses were dwelled by hundreds of people because of their great size and they were purely residential. The lecture opposes this theory saying that these houses inside cast doubt of how many people live inside. He claims that if many people live in these great houses, they will need a fireplace to meet their needs. However, the findings did not find these fireplaces which contradict the theory of these houses being residential.
Second, the reading propose another theory that these houses were used for their large rooms as food storages like maize for example, or grains. The profesor in the lecture refutes that, saying that even the idea is blauseable, however, the excavation did not find any evidence of spilled maize to support the use of these houses as a storage for food.
Lastly, the reading mentions a third theory of the utilization of these houses as ceremonial centers. The excavation finding of lots of the pots inside these houses has reinforce this theory. The lectuer , however, contradict that. the professor says that the finding of the large guantities of the broken pots might refer to the trash that has been throwen by the construction workers. This based on the finding of construction subtances and materials like sand, that gives an impression that theses pots was not related to the ceremonies and might simply be the trash that had been left by the construction workers.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 170, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'reinforced'.
Suggestion: reinforced
...ots of the pots inside these houses has reinforce this theory. The lectuer , however, con...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 204, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...s has reinforce this theory. The lectuer , however, contradict that. the professor...
^^
Line 7, column 233, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...The lectuer , however, contradict that. the professor says that the finding of the ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, lastly, may, second, so, third, well, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1472.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00680272109 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44826973709 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482993197279 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 441.9 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.9681610223 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.230769231 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6153846154 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.30769230769 7.06452816374 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.18894779657 0.272083759551 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0723424097357 0.0996497079465 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0782991054032 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129272771417 0.162205337803 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0773406515922 0.0443174109184 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.