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.
Last try:09/25/2020 03:56
Both reading passage and lecture discuss whether purposes the buildings of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were maneuvering. The former engages that there were three ways the earlier settlement used these larger houses, but the later contradicts each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage claims that the Chaco home was for dwelling purposes as it was quite alike of the apartment structure at Taos, New Mexico, and each of these accommodations might give support for almost hundreds of people. However, the lecture claims that though the outer structure looked like apartment buildings, the inside of this house had only fewer fireplaces for maintaining 100 people. There were more rooms, but few fire areas for cooking purposes proved that this place might be the habitat of a maximum of 10 people.
Secondly, the text asserts that Chaco layouts were for stockpiling of grain maize as the size of this was perfect for this. In contrast, the listening contends that if it was for hoarding maize, then there might be present evidence of maize container. Hence, the excavation of the floor could not get proof of any maize container, pants, or seeds.
In third, the reading passage states that it might be for occasional purposes as it looked similar to Pueblo Alto, and a large number of breaking pots found in the mound deposits through digging. On the other hand, the lecturer affirms that breaking parts of the pot might be the trass box of the construction workers. As many constructional tools, sands, etc. found besides these pots, and for these reasons, it might not be the recreational centers.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 120, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...s it looked similar to Pueblo Alto, and a large number of breaking pots found in the mound deposi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, hence, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, third, well, as for, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1377.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 276.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98913043478 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49795915439 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572463768116 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 405.0 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.51434878587 396% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.983538957 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.75 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.6666666667 7.06452816374 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.153271565605 0.272083759551 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0556361401914 0.0996497079465 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0634879052588 0.0662205650399 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100586580994 0.162205337803 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0690385353805 0.0443174109184 156% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.