The reading and the lecture are both about the artifacts found in Scotland, carved stone balls. The author of the reading notices some evidence in order to elaborate their function in the past while the lecturer casts doubt the claims made in the article as the following reasons.
First of all, the author believes that the mentioned discoveries were being used in regard to fighting and hunting. In addition, some holes on them have been found in relation to proving the author's idea. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She thinks that any weapons utilized in that time had some signs such as wave whereas these clues have not been observed in the stone balls. Moreover, the surfaces of them are so clear and soft without having symbols of fighting.
Secondly, the author contends that these objects must have been used for weighing and measuring quantities including grain and food. The lecturer refutes this argument. She says that the stones consisted of three distinctive materials such as sand, green and cord; consequently, each of them has different weight. Thus they were inconvenient for measuring.
Eventually, the author points out that the carved stones illustrate useful evidence for proving social goals. Furthermore, the carves on them show social information of their owners. The woman on the lecture, on the other hand, has inconsistent opinions from the reading. She suggests, the simplicity of carves on the stones contradicts the standpoint of author. Besides that, none of the stone balls have been buried near the graves of high rank of community while they buried with their most important possession.
- TPO34 integrated 66
- TPO 29 – Integrated 80
- Tpo 35 integrated 3
- TPO-33 - Integrated Writing Task 75
- TPO-32 - Integrated Writing Task Starting in the 1960s and continuing until the 1980s, sailors in Russian submarines patrolling the North Alantic and Arctic Ocean would occasionally hear strange sounds. These underwater noises reminded the submarine crews 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 192, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e been found in relation to proving the authors idea. This point is challenged by the l...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 315, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...tly, each of them has different weight. Thus they were inconvenient for measuring. ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, consequently, first, furthermore, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, whereas, while, in addition, such as, first of all, in regard to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1378.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 267.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16104868914 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04229324003 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52763763468 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.588014981273 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 405.9 419.366225166 97% => 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: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.096637256 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.125 110.228320801 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6875 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5 7.06452816374 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
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: 0.363004524494 0.272083759551 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100767047532 0.0996497079465 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0599477751495 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199901353661 0.162205337803 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0659643650864 0.0443174109184 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.