In the lecture, the professor discusses why the three explanations listed in the passage on the source of "quackers" are not reasonable.
To begin with, the passage claims that the sounds might be made by ocra whales living nearby. However, the speaker refutes this by saying that the whales live near the surface of the water, so the sound cannot reach the submarine that is deep in the sea. In addition, the whales were not detected by sonar.
Secondly, whilst the reading material asserts that giant squids might be the source of the sounds, the lecturer points out that "quackers" existed between 1960s and 1980s and then disappeared, but giant squids always lives there. Thus, the sounds cannot be simply explained by giant squids.
Finally, the sounds is not likely to be emitted by submarines of another country, which is the third argument in the passage. As a response, the professor states that sources of "quackers" moved really fast and changed directions frequently, and it is not practical for any country to build such advanced submarines without detectable engine noise even today.
In conclusion, based reasons and analysis by the speaker, orca whales, giant squids and other country's submarines mentioned in the reading passage cannot be the source of "quackers".
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, really, second, secondly, so, then, third, thus, in addition, in conclusion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 22.412803532 36% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => 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: 1124.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 210.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35238095238 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80675409584 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21008897101 2.5805825403 124% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.590476190476 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 328.5 419.366225166 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.6985109131 49.2860985944 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.888888889 110.228320801 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3333333333 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.5555555556 7.06452816374 178% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.237929398211 0.272083759551 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115041654128 0.0996497079465 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0540787769926 0.0662205650399 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128306359394 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0773867107685 0.0443174109184 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.