gold mask
Both the reading and the listening are talking about a gold mask which archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann found in a 3500-year-old Greek tomb. But they contradict each other. The reading believes the mask is a fake while the listening casts doubt on the idea of the reading.
First, about the Schliemann's had been dishonest before. The lecturer claims that the Greek government already noticed the Schliemann's behavior before, so they watched this exploration closely by a supervisor. Schliemann really did not have enough chance or time to cheat. The government wanted to make sure that the mask is not a fake too. This conflicts the first reading idea.
Second, the professor points out that the mask is another art style at that ancient age. This style is similar with other king mask of that time. They all have perfect and clear details about the lips and the beard. This challenges the reading point that this mask beard does not resemble the facial hair at that age.
Finally, the listening asserts that Schliemann stopping from exploring the site was reasonable at that age. In the past, most of the archaeologists were treasure hunters. They did work for digging the site but they did not know the culture behind of the treasure. Like Schliemann, he always found the valuable treasure in difference place, however, he stopped exploring quickly when he realized the site was worthless. He only cares about the value not the culture. This opposes the reading third idea that the Schliemann abrupt closing of the site because he knew the mask was a fake.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, really, second, so, third, while, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1303.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95437262357 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5284113303 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.555133079848 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 377.1 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.9357550349 49.2860985944 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 72.3888888889 110.228320801 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.6111111111 21.698381199 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 7.06452816374 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.192468262122 0.272083759551 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0578542215826 0.0996497079465 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0779435879331 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127601260905 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0885618934579 0.0443174109184 200% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.2 13.3589403974 69% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 74.19 53.8541721854 138% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 11.0289183223 58% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.45 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.2008830022 62% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.