TPO 32
The reading passage and lecture have conflicting opinions about what caused quackers sounds which were heard by russian submarines in the Atlantic ocean. The article strongly postulates that there are three assumptions what spread out it. On the other hand, the listening adamantly delineates that none of the author's theories is plausible.
First and foremost, according to the professor in the lecture, orca whales' theory was convincing in the first; however, these animals lived on the surface of the ocean, not in the deep. Hence, there was no way to hear these sounds from the bottom of the ocean. Nonetheless, the author offsets these points by declaring that both female and male orca whales lived near the area where these sounds were heard. In addition to this, the male whales usually made sounds to appeal to their mates which were very alike to these quackers.
On top of this, the lecturer further asserts that russian submarines heard these sound in 1960, but after two decades these noises disappeared. To be more specific, there were no sounds heard again after only 20 years, so it was impossible to believe in this hypothesis. These claims refute the article's indications about giant squid which was a soft-bodied animal with no skeleton might have caused it. Therefore, no sonar detectors could identify it. however, this giant squid was assumed as a genius one, so it was capable to emit such sound.
Lastly, the speaker in the lecture suggests that if it had been military communication technology of foreign submarines', it would have changed the direction of its sounds; however, quackers sounds just encircled the surface of the ocean. Furthermore, there was no technology which identified fast engine noise. Nevertheless, the author counters this implication by insisting that russian submarines might have heard the military's technology sounds which could not be discovered by sonar.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, therefore, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1609.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 309.0 270.72406181 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2071197411 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59152788894 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559870550162 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.3190323671 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.266666667 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.354470686322 0.272083759551 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117651083487 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0684638156312 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.219262382884 0.162205337803 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.014866671056 0.0443174109184 34% => 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: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.