tpo 30
The reading and the lecture discuss a Greek weapon called a "burning mirror". The passage presents three reasons to explain why this weapon couldn't exist in that period. Whereas, the professor argues about these reasons and points out her explanation about why she thinks the mentioned reasons are unconvincing.
First, the reading claims the ancient Greeks were not advanced enough to make such a weapon. However, the lecturer contradicts this idea by explaining about they needn't form a single sheet of Cupper for making this weapon. Indeed, they could make dozens of small individual sheets of Cupper and assemble them to form a single mirror for making this weapon.
Second, the passage claims this weapon couldn't be practical because it took a long time to set a ship on fire. However, the lecturer refutes this reason because she believes that there are other materials on a ship except for wood like seals, which were used for waterproofing the ships, that help ships set on fire more quickly.
Third, the reading states the burning weapon doesn't have any advantages rather than other weapons like flaming arrows in which they both have been effective for the same distance. However, the professor rejects this reason and believes the flaming arrow was a common weapon in which Romans were familiar with it. On the contrary, they aren't familiar with the burning mirror. Thus, this weapon was much more surprising for them.
Although the passage presents three reasons to prove that the story of the burning mirror is just a myth, the lecture explains why these reasons cannot convince us.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 59, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...e lecture discuss a Greek weapon called a 'burning mirror'. The passage...
^
Line 1, column 151, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...hree reasons to explain why this weapon couldnt exist in that period. Whereas, the prof...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 163, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: needn't
...icts this idea by explaining about they neednt form a single sheet of Cupper for makin...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 40, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
... Second, the passage claims this weapon couldnt be practical because it took a long tim...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 46, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
..., the reading states the burning weapon doesnt have any advantages rather than other w...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 336, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...familiar with it. On the contrary, they arent familiar with the burning mirror. Thus,...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, second, so, third, thus, whereas, except for, on the contrary
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 : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => 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: 1352.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 265.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10188679245 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36440315479 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550943396226 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 396.0 419.366225166 94% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.3281265138 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.0 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3846153846 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.92307692308 7.06452816374 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32669655452 0.272083759551 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126954331221 0.0996497079465 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587612781145 0.0662205650399 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174288266834 0.162205337803 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0570975873709 0.0443174109184 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
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: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.