TPO10 Integrated Writing
The reading and listening materials have a conflict about whether the vessels were ancient batteries. The writer believes that these vessels should by no means be identified as batteries, which is contradicted by the following lecture.
For starters, the author claims that there is not any metal wires that were found nearby while the speaker views this issue from an opposite angle. That is, these vessels were discovered by local people, not by archeologists. In this situation, it is highly likely that these untrained local ones cannot recognize metal wires and conductors. So, they may overlooked them and threw away these.
In addition, the passage argues that these vessels may be used to hold scrolls by raising an example of copper cylinders in Seleucia. However, the professor opposes this argument by saying that this copper cylinders in the vessels may function for scrolling at first, whereas it can also serve another purpose later. Actually, it is the case that when the copper cylinders are filled with some liquid and such stuff, they can create electricity. Therefore, the first battery is born in such process.
Finally, the writer views that batteries were useless for ancient people. By contrast, in accordance with the professor, his statement cannot hold water. Because the batteries can produce mild shock and tingling sensation, （so）ancient people may take advantage of this invisible power to make others believe that they have magic power. Also, nowadays, doctors use electric current from batteries to stimulate muscle, reducing pains. Therefore, chances are high that ancient people may use it for the same sake.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-03-10 | Angelina2016 | 65 | view |
| 2017-03-09 | Angelina2016 | 70 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 141, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... The writer believes that these vessels should by no means be identified as batt...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, whereas, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1394.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 262.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32061068702 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57425134782 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614503816794 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 425.7 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => 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: 41.0197784273 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.9333333333 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4666666667 21.698381199 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.53333333333 7.06452816374 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.10153667285 0.272083759551 37% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0341241962665 0.0996497079465 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.016275537426 0.0662205650399 25% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0572348352087 0.162205337803 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0155599531233 0.0443174109184 35% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.28 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.12 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.