Ancient methods in wars were always a crucial thing among researchers. There are rumors of an object called "burning mirror" that were used to defence and fire up enemy's ships. More specifically the writer puts forth the idea that the story of the burning mirror is just a myth and the Greeks of Syracuse never really built such a device. How ever, the professor points out that there are some serious flaws in the writer's claim. To be exact the professor believes that burning mirror was a real thing. She more or less addresses the problem with each point made in the reading.
First of all, the writer claims that the ancient Greeks were not technologically advanced enough to make such a device. He thinks the technology for manufacturing a large sheet of copper with such specifications did not exist in the ancient world. But the professor refutes with this point and says that Greeks could made the mirror with dozens of small piece of polished coppers and put them together to a big curved mirror.
Secondly, the reading states that burning mirror would have taken a long time to set the ships on fire, and there were not enough time for Greeks to set the ships on fire with the mirror. The professor, not surprisingly though, believes that it's the wood that take so much time to get on fire, but Greeks put pitch part of the ships on fire, the sticky layer that made ships resists the water.
Finally, the author wraps up the topic by claiming that the burning mirror does not seem like an improvement on a weapon that the Greeks already had: flaming arrows. Then again, the professor stays on the other side of the argument and says that since Romans soldiers knows how to put off flaming arrows to prevent ship from burning, burning mirror was a good weapon to attack them and set ships on fire.
In conclusion, the author and the professor obviously hold opposing views about burning mirrors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 350, Rule ID: HOW_EVER[1]
Message: Did you mean 'however'?
Suggestion: However
...acuse never really built such a device. How ever, the professor points out that there ar...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 318, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'make'
Suggestion: make
...h this point and says that Greeks could made the mirror with dozens of small piece o...
^^^^
Line 5, column 243, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
... not surprisingly though, believes that its the wood that take so much time to get ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, really, second, secondly, so, then, in conclusion, first of all, more or less
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1590.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 337.0 270.72406181 124% => OK
Chars per words: 4.71810089021 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36218927848 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 145.348785872 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53115727003 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.8304240494 49.2860985944 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.571428571 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0714285714 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.28571428571 7.06452816374 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => 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: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 53.8541721854 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.39 12.2367328918 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.