R. robustus
The lecture and the reading are both about R. robustus as a hunter dinosaur. Whereas the reading explains that R. robustus was not an active hunter, the lecturer argues that it was. The lecture respond to the specific points made in the reading passage by arguing against the three main reasons.
Firstly, according to the reading R. robustus was smaller than its prey (psittacosaurs and similar dinosaurs), so it was not able to hunt them. However, the lecturer refutes this point. The lecturer argues that even R robustus was smaller than many dinosaurs (twice the mass), it could have hunted baby dinosaurs.
Second, the reading points out that R. robustus had short legs and positioned somewhat to the side, so that suggest that it was a scavenger dinosaur instead of an active- hunter one. Nevertheless, the lecturer disputes this point. She gave an example of a recent hunter mammal (Tasmania devil) who has similar legs. This mammal can run 15km per hour and it is an active and success hunter when it chase after its prey. Thus, R. robust may have been a hunter quite similar to Tasmania devil.
Finally, the reading explained that no teeth marks were found on fossils inside of R.robust stomach, suggesting that R. robustus swallowed its prey instead of hunted it. On the other hand, the professor argues that the absent of marks suggest that R. robustus had powerfull jaws and swallowed the whole prey or ate it in pieces.
To sum up, although the reading and the passage are both about R robust as a hunter, the points made in the reading are effectively challenged and contradicted by the lecturer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 396, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'chases'?
Suggestion: chases
...is an active and success hunter when it chase after its prey. Thus, R. robust may hav...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, thus, whereas, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1335.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 276.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83695652174 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44655914476 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514492753623 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 401.4 419.366225166 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.9896866724 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 66.75 110.228320801 61% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.8 21.698381199 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.6 7.06452816374 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221894390605 0.272083759551 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0811722689396 0.0996497079465 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.125711950591 0.0662205650399 190% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136301087952 0.162205337803 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0849179671507 0.0443174109184 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.3 13.3589403974 62% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.74 53.8541721854 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.2 12.2367328918 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.54 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 4.5 10.7273730684 42% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.