In 1938 an archaeologist in Iraq acquired a set of clay jars that had been excavated two years earlier by villagers constructing a railroad line. The vessel was about 2,200 years old. Each clay jar contained a copper cylinder surrounding an iron rod. The archaeologist proposed that vessels were ancient electric batteries and even demonstrated that they can produce a small electric current when filled with some liquids. However, it is not likely that the vessels were actually used as electric batteries in ancient times.
First of all, if the vessels were used as batteries, they would probably have been attached to some electricity conductors such as metal wires. But there is no evidence that any metal wires were located near the vessels. All that has been excavated are the vessels themselves.
Second, the copper cylinders inside the jars look exactly like copper cylinders discovered in the ruins of Seleucia, an ancient city located nearby. We know that the copper cylinders from Seleucia were used for holding scrolls of sacred texts, not for generating electricity. Since the cylinders found with the jars have the same shape, it is very likely they were used for holding scrolls as well. That no scrolls were found inside the jars can be explained by the fact that the scrolls simply disintegrated over the centuries.
Finally, what could ancient people have done with the electricity that the vessels were supposed to have generated? They had no devices that relied on electricity. As batteries, the vessels would have been completely useless to them.
The reading is about the excavated jar that were not used as a electric batteries. It provides three supporting ideas in order to bolster its claim. However, the professor says, the vessel were used as electric batteries. She refutes each of the passage claim.
First, the article asserts that the vessel were not used as electric batteries as there was no electric conductor such as metal wire was found along with the jar. However, the lecturer denies this claim. She says, the discovery of the vessel were conducted by the local people, as they are not expert alike archaeologist. So, they might have been overlooked the conductor and left that material as an unworthy.
Second, the reading states that copper cylinder of the jar were same as Seleucia, where it was used as a sacred text other than battery. But, the speaker refutes to agree with this opinion. She explains that the original discovery of copper cylinders contained iron rod. Although, the use of copper cylinder would have been changed but the purpose of copper cylinder for used as electric batteries.
Third, the written excerpt claims that the primitive people were not depend on anything like that vessel where electricity were need to use. The point is quite unconvincing with the professor. She says, ancient were using electricity for shock, tingling. It was magical for them. Moreover, modern research have found, the minimum volt of electricity can be used for healing. So, the outdated people were using electricity for healing purpose
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 62, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...the excavated jar that were not used as a electric batteries. It provides three s...
^
Line 1, column 73, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'batterie', 'battery'?
Suggestion: batterie; battery
...ed jar that were not used as a electric batteries. It provides three supporting ideas in ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 399, Rule ID: DT_JJ_NO_NOUN[1]
Message: Probably a noun is missing in this part of the sentence.
...the conductor and left that material as an unworthy. Second, the reading states that cop...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 70, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'depended'.
Suggestion: depended
...aims that the primitive people were not depend on anything like that vessel where elec...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, look, moreover, second, so, third, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 18.0 30.3222958057 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1276.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 251.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08366533865 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47763283512 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 145.348785872 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.537848605578 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 400.5 419.366225166 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => 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: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.0824722327 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 70.8888888889 110.228320801 64% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.9444444444 21.698381199 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 7.06452816374 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.126920871112 0.272083759551 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0453295883546 0.0996497079465 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0487309306987 0.0662205650399 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0924239819137 0.162205337803 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0529746275203 0.0443174109184 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.5 13.3589403974 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 53.8541721854 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.59 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.