The reading and the speaker discuss about the ancient jar found in the local area while working on the railroad. The lecturer and passage contrast each other entirely.
First, passage says that ancient people might be used this jar not as electric battery because there is no wire surrounding jar cylinder or no attachment to this jar. But, the lecture states that those found the jar were not archaeologist, so, they might thrown it away. It is mean that ancient people did not use it as a battery.
Secondly, reading suggests that it might be used as scroll on the sacred script due to it cylinder shape because it every similar to fit with that size and shape. Further, there were no such line mark inside the jar. Again, lecturer argues this view by stating that they used the iron and some liquid in clay which might be use for conducting the electricity in those days.
Finally, reading claims that there were no other devices rather than these jars alone, so how can the used as batteries-no replied devices. Still, the professor opposes this idea by explaining that because it produce mild shock, they might for-invisible power purposes. Even, some evidences shows that they used the electricity for healing and reduces the pain.
To sum up, reading says that jar might no be used as batteries because of no wire attachment, same like scrolls and there were no relied deices, but, the refuses all these points by some evidences.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 256, Rule ID: PRP_PAST_PART[2]
Message: Did you mean 'have thrown' or 'throw'?
Suggestion: have thrown; throw
... were not archaeologist, so, they might thrown it away. It is mean that ancient people...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 18, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...se it as a battery. Secondly, reading suggests that it might be used as scroll...
^^
Line 7, column 210, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'produces'?
Suggestion: produces
...this idea by explaining that because it produce mild shock, they might for-invisible po...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 40, Rule ID: NOW[3]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
... To sum up, reading says that jar might no be used as batteries because of no wire...
^^
Line 9, column 199, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ses all these points by some evidences.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, second, secondly, so, still, while, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 18.0 30.3222958057 59% => More preposition wanted.
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: 1200.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 249.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81927710843 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.35252255016 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.55421686747 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 371.7 419.366225166 89% => 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: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.9755369735 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.0 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.75 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
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: 0.343840709969 0.272083759551 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.132671442525 0.0996497079465 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0614352174068 0.0662205650399 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201005015705 0.162205337803 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0706000235182 0.0443174109184 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.2367328918 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 63.6247240618 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.