TPO-33
The lecture is investigating the purpose and meaning of the carved stone balls found in Scotland and suggesting that there are three possible theories to explain it. However, the professor in the lecture reckons that none of these three theories are convincing and she utilizes three specific arguments to pinpoint to the flaws existing in the statement of the text.
To start with, the author of the reading passage suggests that the carved stone balls were used as weapons for hunting or fighting since some of the carved stone balls are found with holes in them or grooves on the surface, which enabled them to be strung through by a cord so as to allow a person to swing it around or throw it. Nevertheless, the professor rebuts the idea that, initially, the stone balls were not similar to other weapons found in the Neolithic period. Additionally, there was no crack or pieces broken off. Because it is impossible for weapons to stay intact without any damage or wear, the carved stone balls were not weapons used at the aim of hunting or fighting.
What's more, despite the assertion in the passage that the stone balls were utilized as components of a rudimentary system of weights and measures, the professor contends that owing of the varieties of stone employed to produce the carved balls, like sandstone, grindstone, quartz and so on, and their disparate characteristics of density, although they were identical in size, they were not in the same weight. Hence, it implies that they could not be adopted as a standard unite of measure.
Finally, the author argues that the carved stone balls served a social purpose instead of for a practical function, whereas the professor refutes this idea with two details. For one thing, some stones were merely simply decorated, which fell to indicate the owners' social status. For another, nothing asset has been found in the grave, which was inconsistent with the phenomenon that high ranking people were usually be buried with numerous possessions in their bombs or graves.
In a nutshell, the professor convincingly pinpoints the weaknesses existing in the article and verifies that all theories mentioned here are not justified.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-30 | Somayya | 73 | view |
| 2019-04-03 | toefl 2019 | 3 | view |
| 2019-04-03 | toefl 2019 | 3 | view |
| 2019-02-13 | Amirhossein_Az | 63 | view |
| 2019-02-09 | persepolistmm | 80 | view |
- Technology desighed to make people's lives simpler actually makes people's livies more complicated 90
- Government has done enough to educate people the importance of a balanced lifestyle and healthy eating habits 84
- If your friend wants to reduce living expenses, which would you suggest?1. Find a roommate that can share the living expenses.2. Buy the new technology products less frequently.3. Shop for less expensive food and cooking at home 70
- The best way to increase students’ interest in a subject is to explain to them how this subject can help them in their lives outside the school. 90
- What is the most useful way to help the natural environment?Plant more trees and build parksStores stop providing plastic bagsIncrease access to public transportation to reduce the number of cars on the road 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 138, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...s weapons for hunting or fighting since some of the carved stone balls are found with holes...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 275, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...led them to be strung through by a cord so as to allow a person to swing it around or th...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...at the aim of hunting or fighting. Whats more, despite the assertion in the pass...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, hence, however, if, nevertheless, so, whereas, as to, for one thing, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.4613686534 191% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 30.3222958057 171% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1842.0 1373.03311258 134% => OK
No of words: 365.0 270.72406181 135% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04657534247 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5933413588 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.523287671233 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 419.366225166 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 21.2450331126 141% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 95.8211224105 49.2860985944 194% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.5 110.228320801 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.4166666667 21.698381199 140% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.499320929754 0.272083759551 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.171243367553 0.0996497079465 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.126420295267 0.0662205650399 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.233206154272 0.162205337803 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.140845300803 0.0443174109184 318% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 13.3589403974 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.49 53.8541721854 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 63.6247240618 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 10.7273730684 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.498013245 133% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.2008830022 161% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.