TPO32-integrated
The reading passage mentions to three theories to prove the main reason of an outlandish sound, quackers which the Russian sailors detected during their patrolling in the north Atlantic in the 1960s until 1980s. The lecturer clarifies his disagreement for each theory that mentioned in the reading.
First of all, base on the professor’s opinion about reading part which mentions to relationship between noises and men and female Orca whales due to beckon each other as a first theory, seems against fact. In the other words, surface of water are known as Orca whales’ inhabit. As a result, there is no relationship between debated noises and mentioned reason in the first theory.
As second theory, the reading passage refers the giant squid as the cause of voice. According to this theory, giant squid which live in the deep part of ocean, their curiosity guided to approach the submarine. However, the lecturer rejects this theory because this animal live in that area until now but the quackers heard just for two decades in 1960s until 1980s. thus, second theory can’t be acceptable.
Third , the professor repudiates creating this sounds by foreign submarines that tried to be undetectable for Russian Submarine but, froglike sound create unintentionally. Due to modifying the sound’s direction swiftly mentioned concept should be reject. Plus, today there isn’t a swift submarine and without sound.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The reading passage mentions to three th...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...heory that mentioned in the reading. First of all, base on the professor&apos...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...entioned reason in the first theory. As second theory, the reading passage re...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 350, Rule ID: IN_1990s[1]
Message: The article is probably missing here: 'in the 1960s'.
Suggestion: in the 1960s
...the quackers heard just for two decades in 1960s until 1980s. thus, second theory can&ap...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 372, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
...t for two decades in 1960s until 1980s. thus, second theory can't be acceptable...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ond theory can't be acceptable. Third , the professor repudiates creatin...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 11, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... can't be acceptable. Third , the professor repudiates creating this ...
^^
Line 7, column 258, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'rejected'?
Suggestion: rejected
...ion swiftly mentioned concept should be reject. Plus, today there isn't a swift s...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, third, thus, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 22.412803532 45% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => 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: 1210.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 226.0 270.72406181 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35398230088 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87727950738 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73725365813 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.601769911504 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 351.0 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.7804177497 49.2860985944 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.833333333 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8333333333 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.243437383244 0.272083759551 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0876318331954 0.0996497079465 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0652639864906 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140756240724 0.162205337803 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0679659604116 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.