tpo 31
The main idea of both the passage and the lecture is about the evidence on fine lines surrounding the fossil of Sinosauropteryx. Having this in mind, the passage mentions that these lines were not feather and these dinosaurs should not be considered as feathered animals by providing three arguments. The lecturer, on the other hand, categorically refutes all the three reasons mentioned in the text, citing that the evidence is really strong and what was mentioned by the critics of the passage is not convincing.
First, both the text and the talk discuss the notion that refers the fine lines to be the decomposed fibers of the animal. In this line of thought, the author claims that having buried in the volcanic ash, the skin of animal was decomposed into fiber. Conversely, the lecturer denies this argument, mentioning that this line was not the result of decomposition because one cannot observe results of decomposition of other animals buried in that site. Accordingly, evidence from other site of shows that the functional skin of animal was beautifully preserved in the ash and the lines are preserved as the feather not fiber.
Second, both the passage and the speech put forth the idea of other possibility of parts of body. In this regard, the author states that the lines surrounding the skeleton of the animals resemble frills more than feather. The lecturer, however, claims that there exist a chemical difference between feather and frills. According to the lecturer, feather consists of a protein under the name of Beta-Keratin unlike frill which does not encompass any of this protein. On the basis of this comparison, it is crystal clear that the lines are feather not frills.
Eventually, both the reading and the lecture talk about the function of feather to be used to preserve internal temperature and fly. In this vein, the reading explains that since the lines were located in the back bone of the animal, it should not be considered as feather because the animal never used the feather to fly. However, the lecturer refutes this notion, citing that the feather could have been used for other functions and purposes. He further adds that peacock has long colorful feathers to attract mate, a phenomenon known as display function. Moreover, the analysis of the synosauropteyx revealed that they had a colorful structure of orange and white for displaying function.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 198, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'feathered'.
Suggestion: feathered
...sage mentions that these lines were not feather and these dinosaurs should not be consi...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, conversely, first, however, if, moreover, really, second, so, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 30.3222958057 165% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2004.0 1373.03311258 146% => OK
No of words: 397.0 270.72406181 147% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04785894207 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.04702891845 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65519621456 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465994962217 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 622.8 419.366225166 149% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.5264899461 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.882352941 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3529411765 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.41176470588 7.06452816374 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.363560483464 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121554966898 0.0996497079465 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0736529415592 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215201813423 0.162205337803 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0489770754119 0.0443174109184 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 63.6247240618 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.