The article states that there are some massive and high stone buildings called 'great houses' at the Chaco Canyon in New Mexico and provides three competing theories about the uses of the buildings. However, the professor explains that none of the theories provide convincing argument and refutes each of the theories in the passage.
First, the reading posits that the Chaco structures may be purely residential, with each housing hundreds of people. But the professor says that though the outside might give the impression of residential building, the inside cast serious doubt on the theory. He states that for hundreds of people residing in the building there must be many fireplaces where the daily cooking can be carried out. But, there are not many fireplaces inside the great houses. Inside the largest great house, there are few fireplaces which can support only ten families. So, this theory is not cogent.
Second, the passage claims that the great houses were used to store food supplies and grain maize, one of the main crops of the Chaco people, could be stored here for long periods of time. The professor refutes the claim by stating that there is lack of evidence supporting this theory. Though the theory may sound plausible, there is not any significant sized container found from the structure. Also, if the structure were used as food storage there must have been some amount spilled maize but there is not any.
Third, the reading states that the houses were used as ceremonial centers and presents the large number of broaken pots found from the mound as supporting evidence. However, the professor mentions that this theory is not well supported. According to the professor, there were other materials found in the mound like building materials and construction tools. A lot of construction materials were trashed and the pots which were found might be some regular trash from construction workers. So, this theory doesn't hold in the view of the professor.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 506, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...m construction workers. So, this theory doesnt hold in the view of the professor.
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'so', 'third', 'well']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.263157894737 0.261695866417 101% => OK
Verbs: 0.160664819945 0.158904122519 101% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0747922437673 0.0723426182421 103% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0443213296399 0.0435111971325 102% => OK
Pronouns: 0.00277008310249 0.0277247811725 10% => Some pronouns wanted.
Prepositions: 0.127423822715 0.128828473217 99% => OK
Participles: 0.0498614958449 0.0370669169778 135% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.40540858938 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Infinitives: 0.00554016620499 0.0208969081088 27% => Some infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.00277008310249 0.00154638098197 179% => OK
Determiners: 0.138504155125 0.128158765124 108% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0249307479224 0.0158828679856 157% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00831024930748 0.0114777025283 72% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1984.0 1645.83664459 121% => OK
No of words: 328.0 271.125827815 121% => OK
Chars per words: 6.0487804878 6.08160592843 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04852973271 105% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.353658536585 0.374372842146 94% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.259146341463 0.287516216867 90% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.167682926829 0.187439937562 89% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.109756097561 0.113142543107 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40540858938 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52743902439 0.539623497131 98% => OK
Word variations: 55.3046827347 53.8517498576 103% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0529801325 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.2941176471 21.7502111507 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.7661290091 49.3711431718 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.705882353 132.220823453 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2941176471 21.7502111507 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.588235294118 0.878197800319 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.39072847682 29% => OK
Readability: 45.2087517934 50.5018328374 90% => OK
Elegance: 2.12 1.90840788429 111% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.422829441197 0.549887131256 77% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.15525009707 0.142949733639 109% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.106404747097 0.0787303798458 135% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.582729074916 0.631733273073 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.155471652158 0.139662658121 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.184133826247 0.266732575781 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104766911892 0.103435571967 101% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.503200837661 0.414875509568 121% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0313260321586 0.0530846634433 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.327078244101 0.40443939384 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.065399295563 0.0528353158467 124% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.26048565121 141% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 3.49668874172 200% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.62251655629 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 3.1766004415 94% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 10.2958057395 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.