As
Both the reading and the lecture discuss whether the Pyramids building theory. The former argues that the theories in the reading are not valid for the following three reasons.
First of all the 1st theory said that a long and straight ramp was able to carry large stone to the upper part of the Pyramids to construct the total structure. In contrast, the lecturer argues that building such a ramp need a 1.5 km long and 160 m tall ramp, and the space was also massive to carry such a ramp. Moreover, this needs the ramp mass more than the actual Pyramids mass which seems unpractical.
Secondly, the second theory predicts that the ramp supports the work internally with the help of massive cranes that can transport the heavy block of rock. However, the professor rebuts that it is impossible to build since it had to be sealed with the structure and also carry such massive block at 90 degrees is impossible. He further added that it need such types of crane which were unavailable in Egypt at that time and they had to import them from Lebanon and there is no relics of such type of ramp been discovered in Egypt.
Finally, The text claims that the blocks were built by crushing the limestone into a powder then cementing it into the block and also support that theory with some x-ray evidence. On the other hand, the listening counts that, this synthesize process was discovered about 2000 years after the Pyramids were built and also contends that the x-ray results might have been from the result of reconstruction or repairing of the Pyramids not of the time of its building.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 255, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'ramp' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'ramps'.
Suggestion: ramps
... ramp need a 1.5 km long and 160 m tall ramp, and the space was also massive to carr...
^^^^
Line 5, column 466, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are no relics'?
Suggestion: there are no relics
...hey had to import them from Lebanon and there is no relics of such type of ramp been discovered in...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => 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: 1312.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 281.0 270.72406181 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.66903914591 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.31640069656 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.555160142349 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 383.4 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.355819234 49.2860985944 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.2 110.228320801 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.1 21.698381199 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.8 7.06452816374 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.98 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.8 11.0289183223 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.1 12.2367328918 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.