Chaco Canyon in New Mexico
The reading explains three theories about the function of the mysterious great houses of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico. However, the lecturer claims that none of the mentioned theories are convincing enough and he rejected all of them.
First, the reading states that due to Chaco houses resemblance to large apartment building built by other ancient societies, Chaco houses might have been a residential place for hundreds people. The lecturer opposed to this theory and contended that the Chaco houses only contained few numbers of fire-places, many fewer than the families living in the houses would need for cooking.
Secondly, the reading asserted that the Chaco houses might have been used to store food supplies such as grain maize. On the other hand, the lecturer reject this theory too as there is not enough evidence. He explained that if the building had been used to store this crop, we would have found more signs such as maize containers.
Finally, the reading suggested that the Chaco houses could have been a place for holding ceremonies. Archeologists have found a mound containing broken pots which might be used for special occasions. In contrast, the lecturer noted that so many other objects were discovered in the mound too. He explains that these object were just trash.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 73, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ies about the function of the mysterious great houses of Chaco Canyon in New Mexi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 17.0 30.3222958057 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1087.0 1373.03311258 79% => OK
No of words: 213.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10328638498 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42399053713 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 145.348785872 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.572769953052 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 321.3 419.366225166 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.7114417284 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.8181818182 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3636363636 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.18181818182 7.06452816374 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16999463411 0.272083759551 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0672601524746 0.0996497079465 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.12042224362 0.0662205650399 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115232368752 0.162205337803 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101306862446 0.0443174109184 229% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 63.6247240618 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.