TPO 17-task1
The lecture and the passage discuss about the limitation of archarology science. Although the passage claims that the archaeology science has been limited by few financial supporting, job positioning and new foundations to dig, The speaker refutes this ideas through the number of reasons which will be described in this report.
First of all, the passage points out that a grreat number of valuable artifacts were lost due to the construction projects and the growth of constructing have led to build plenty number of structions. Therefor, usually, the artifacts are not preserved and they would destroy through the construction. The speaker, in contrast, rejects this by claiming that in 1990 a rule has been adopted which changed the situation. By this protocol, each space should be examined and invetigated by an archaeology professional to examine the ground whether having ancient artifacts.
Furthermore, unlike the passage which states that most of the archaeology hav not been received adequate financial supporting by government to further exacavations, the speaker argues that the mentioned protocol enforce the constructor to afford the nesseciate financial supoorting for archaeologist who is work on foundation and the archaeologist will be paid adequately rather than before.
Finally, although the passage says that the job position for this profession has become reduced at universities and government agencies, the professor disagress by mentioning that the 1990 protocol has providing large number of available job for archaeologists due to enforce the poeple to hire an archaeology to examine the ground before the trigger of the construction.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-11-14 | raniamekhaiel | 3 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 249, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...foundations to dig, The speaker refutes this ideas through the number of reasons whi...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, if, so, in contrast, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1422.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.59842519685 5.08290768461 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08094449551 2.5805825403 119% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566929133858 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 423.0 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => 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: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 112.762748725 49.2860985944 229% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 177.75 110.228320801 161% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.75 21.698381199 146% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.75 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.052845097688 0.272083759551 19% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.01839229617 0.0996497079465 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0340299318157 0.0662205650399 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.03678459234 0.162205337803 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0404909792664 0.0443174109184 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.8 13.3589403974 156% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.55 53.8541721854 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.0289183223 151% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 12.2367328918 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.84 8.42419426049 117% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.