As early as the 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 buildings 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. In 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 theory contends that the Chaco structures were used to store food supplies. One of the main crops of the Chaco people was grain maize, which could be stored for long periods of time without spoiling and could serve as a long-lasting supply of food. The supplies of maize had to be stored somewhere, and the size of the great houses would make them very suitable for the purpose.
A third theory proposes that houses were used as ceremonial centers. Close to one house, called Pueblo Alto, archaeologists identified an enormous mound formed by a pile of old material. Excavations of the mound revealed deposits 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.
While the passage proposes theories supporting the how 12th-century settlements of Chao Canyon was used, the lecture
expresses a different point of view opposing these theories.
Firstly,the passage claims that the Chao structures were used purely for residential purposes by 100s of people because of its
similarities to recent Southwest societies houses. However, the lecture argues that 100 people living together are not possible in
these houses. This is evident to the fact that there were only a few fireplaces and with lots of families living together and each
family needs a different fireplace to make their food.
Secondly, the passage asserts that the structures were used for storing the crops, this is because the main crops of Chao people
was grain maize which can be stored for a long time and require a huge space. The lecture contradicts this theory because of the
fact that there weren't any traces of maize or its containers that were found during the excavation.
Finally, the passage states that these buildings served as ceremonial centers, this claim is supported by the large numbers of
broken meal pots found here but the lecture opposes this theory stating that there were lot of other materials like construction
tools, building material was found here and the structure could only be a trash heap where construction workers used to eat and
throw their pots.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 48, Rule ID: THE_HOW[1]
Message: Did you mean 'how'?
Suggestion: how
...he passage proposes theories supporting the how 12th-century settlements of Chao Canyon...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 8, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...f view opposing these theories. Firstly,the passage claims that the Chao structures...
^^^^
Line 8, column 115, Rule ID: BECAUSE_OF_THE_FACT_THAT[1]
Message: This phrase is redundant. Use simply 'because'.
Suggestion: because
...ce. The lecture contradicts this theory because of the fact that there werent any traces of maize or its...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 17, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
... theory because of the fact that there werent any traces of maize or its containers t...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1181.0 1373.03311258 86% => OK
No of words: 227.0 270.72406181 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20264317181 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88156143495 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53281362715 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.590308370044 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 354.6 419.366225166 85% => 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: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 13.0662251656 54% => 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: 32.0 21.2450331126 151% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 90.2515758243 49.2860985944 183% => OK
Chars per sentence: 168.714285714 110.228320801 153% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.4285714286 21.698381199 149% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06452816374 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 12.0 4.09492273731 293% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.098671587226 0.272083759551 36% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0461333768929 0.0996497079465 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0206621091154 0.0662205650399 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0357107316614 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0207643794286 0.0443174109184 47% => 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: 19.3 13.3589403974 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.0 53.8541721854 72% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.0289183223 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.98 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.498013245 141% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
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.