Plowing as a great invention in the agriculture
The lecture criticizes the plow, thus the points in the lecture challenge points in the reading.
First, according to the lecture the plow increases crops,but does not conserve for the future. The professor discussed alternating and no till farming, which is better. This is contrast with the reading that the plow is a great invention because it makes possible large-scaled land agriculture so it provides vast of the crops.
Second, the lecture state the overuse of the plow damage to the soil. For example professor said it causes erosion by the wind and water. In the following of the lecture professor state dust bowl, wind dust storm and run of the soil into the lake and river happened while the plow are extremely. This challenges the point in the reading that tilling soil with a plow improves the soil.
Furthermore, professor in the lecture states that no till farming leaves crops residues on the field, and after a time decomposes completely, consequently this improve the soil however, This is contrast with the passage that state plowing incorporates these residues in to the soil. In addition, tilling loosens and weaken the soil.
Third, the professor mentioned the economic advantage of no till farming. He believed its leads to save fuel and labor costs but passage state the plow reduces the costs and labor requirements of agriculture.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-04 | hosseindehnamaki | 60 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 57, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , but
... to the lecture the plow increases crops,but does not conserve for the future. The p...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, second, so, third, thus, while, for example, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1158.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 225.0 270.72406181 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14666666667 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87298334621 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62378860937 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 145.348785872 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.524444444444 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 346.5 419.366225166 83% => 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: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 61.5888585704 49.2860985944 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.5 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.75 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.206559318611 0.272083759551 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0723003629572 0.0996497079465 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0928562090381 0.0662205650399 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111307729548 0.162205337803 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0918928219289 0.0443174109184 207% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.