tpo 38 an international funds for the world's forests
The material discusses the development of an international fund to protect the world's forests. While the reading looks at the topic from one perspective, the listening challenges this and says that forests are under tremendous pressure, but the suggestions that the reading states are fault for several reasons.
First, the author mentions that using international funds could help forest-agriculture. On the other hand, the professor opposes this and posits that by raising the population, farmers have to increase the harvest of crops. The lecturer explains that farmers would use modern agriculture technology to enhance their productivity, so they use pesticides. The speaker adds that these chemicals have a detrimental effect because they increase waste and water contamination, which have a more negative impact than logging. Thus, according to the reading, protect forest-agriculture is not a good idea.
Second, the reading cits that these funds could promote the financial situation of villages and tribal communities. On the contrary, the professor disagrees and contends that this idea is inadequate. The lecturer explains that the money will go to the forests' owners who are governments. The speaker states that these funds will not end up in the hands of residents, so it could not enhance their economic situation.
Third, the writer posits that the international funds will protect forests' biodiversity. Conversely, the professor contradicts this and states that farmers could use these funds to plant merely trees, which have commercial purposes; thus, it could not help biodiversity. The lecturer adds that develop international monitor could not protect forests. The speaker concludes that this approach is inadequate.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 268, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...the money will go to the forests owners who are governments. The speaker states that th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, look, second, so, third, thus, while, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 18.0 30.3222958057 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1481.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63117870722 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08268657615 2.5805825403 119% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528517110266 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 441.9 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.9676881182 49.2860985944 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.7333333333 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5333333333 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4 7.06452816374 91% => 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 : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189622405627 0.272083759551 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0715043305865 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0841197215517 0.0662205650399 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125992629344 0.162205337803 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0585318191139 0.0443174109184 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 53.8541721854 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.2367328918 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.