The reading and the lecture are both about a set of clay jars that were discovered in Iraq. The author states that those vessels could have been used as electric batteries and provides three reasons for support. However, the lecturer refutes each of the author's reasons and says that they are not convincing.
First of all, the passage points out that those discovered vessels were without wires. It means that they could not produce electricity. In contrast, the lecturer opposes this point by saying that they were found by local people not trained archaeologists. Consequently, they did not know the importance of discovered materials so thrown them and overlooked them uninteresting.
Secondly, the passage posits that copper cylinders inside the jars probably had been used for holding scrolls not for generating electricity as they were similar to those found in the ruins of Seleucia which had been applied for the same purpose. While the lecturer disagrees with this point by mentioning that it is true there were similarities between them but do not prove they just applied for holding scrolls. people mixed copper cylinder with an iron rod and some liquids as a result of that they made electricity. Maybe at first, they used for one purpose later they could adapt to use for other goals.
Finally, the passage asserts that there were not any devices needed to use electric batteries in order to work during that time. On the contrary, the lecturer dispute this point by explaining that electric batteries have possible uses since it produces a mild shock when a person touches it. People interpreted this process as an invisible power and convinced others that they have magical power. In addition, electric batteries in modern life use for healing like relieving pain or stretching muscles; therefore, it could have used for the same purpose in ancient times.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The reading and the lecture are both abo...
^^
Line 3, column 416, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: People
... they just applied for holding scrolls. people mixed copper cylinder with an iron rod ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in addition, in contrast, as a result, first of all, it is true, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 13.8261648746 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 43.0788530466 88% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 52.1666666667 63% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.0752688172 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1568.0 1977.66487455 79% => OK
No of words: 309.0 407.700716846 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07443365696 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.48103885553 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5391891812 2.67179642975 95% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 212.727598566 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.550161812298 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 487.8 618.680645161 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => 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: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.0113029592 48.9658058833 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.533333333 100.406767564 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6 20.6045352989 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.9333333333 5.45110844103 219% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.236089414692 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.076458572812 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0737576698707 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.150856017488 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0645574589148 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: 12.7 11.7677419355 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 10.9000537634 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 86.8835125448 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
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.