Summarize the pint made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific theories discussed in the reading passage.
As early as twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their "great houses," massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand three or four stories high. Archaeologists have been trying to determine how the building were used. While there is still no universally agreed upon explanation, there are three competing theories.
One theory holds that the Chaco structures were purely residential, with each housing hundreds of people. Supporters of this theory have interpreted Chaco great houses as earlier versions of the architecture seen in more recent Southwest societies. Particular, the Chaco houses appear strikingly similar to the large, well known "apartment buildings" at Taos, New Mexico, in which many people have been living for centuries.
A second theories contends that the Chaco structures were used to store food supplies. One of the main corps of the Chaco people was grain maize, ehich could be stored for long priods of time without spoiling and could serve as a long-lasting supply of food. The supplies of maize had to be storedd somewhere, and the size of the great houses would make them very suitable for the purpose.
A third theory proposes that houses were used to as ceremonial centers. Close to one house, called Pueblo Alto, archaeologists identified an enormous mound containing a surprisingly large number of broken pots. This finding has been interpreted as evidence that people gathered at Pueblo Alto for special ceremonies. At the ceremonies. they ate festive meals and then discarded the pots in which the meals had been prepared or served. Such ceremonies have been documented for other Native American cultures.
The lecturer and passage both discuss the use of the Chaco houses by pointing out the evidences. The point of view of the lecturer, however, clearly conflicts with that of the passage in many ways.
For example, lecturer point out that it is unlikely that Chaco houses can be use as resident by thousand of people. Because it has only few fire places which is not sufficient for thousands of people for cooking. However, passage mentioned that Chaco houses are similar to the residential building built by the other societies of the American Southwest.
Additionally, in lecturer's opinion the theory that the function of the Chaco houses was to store grain maize is undermine by the fact that there were very few evidence of the maize or maize containers have been during the excavation of Chaco houses. In contrast, lecturer explained that the size of the great houses make them perfect for storage of grains.
Further, lecturer, however, argues that the mound near the Pueblo Alto house also contains construction materials and tools, which suggest that mounds were just construction trash. Even pots also could be the remains of the construction material. Whereas, passage states that broken pots are evidence of the ceremonies in which food would have been prepared and served.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 113, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'undermined'.
Suggestion: undermined
...haco houses was to store grain maize is undermine by the fact that there were very few ev...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 156, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[6]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun evidence seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'little evidence'.
Suggestion: little evidence
...ermine by the fact that there were very few evidence of the maize or maize containers have b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, so, whereas, as to, for example, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1073.0 1373.03311258 78% => OK
No of words: 212.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06132075472 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81578560438 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53538064941 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 145.348785872 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.561320754717 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 329.4 419.366225166 79% => 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
Article: 2.0 8.23620309051 24% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => 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: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.9668890366 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.3 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.9 7.06452816374 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0887387933301 0.272083759551 33% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0359561444248 0.0996497079465 36% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0302705501034 0.0662205650399 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0528316801292 0.162205337803 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0201835292547 0.0443174109184 46% => 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: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.