carved stone balls
The article presents three ideas which could explain the purpose of Carved stone balls, a particular kind of artifact found in some areas of scotland from the late Neolithic period. The lecturer contradicts points made in the passage and she believes they are not plausible. Her further demostrations are as follows.
Firstly, the shape of the carved stone balls were very well preserved. There was almost no sign of wear such as cracks or parts detached, while other types of weapons from the Neolithic period like arrows mostly had some kind of wear. Thus, the use of the carved stone balls as a weapon is not very likely.
Secondly, as opposed to their similarity in shape, size, and diameter, the carved stone balls vary greatly in mass. The carved balls were made of diffrenet kinds of stones with different densities. Hence, they could not have been a measurement tool either.
Finally, while some stone balls have elaborate designs, many others have paths on them too simple to be considered as symbol of social status. On the other hand, in the Neolithic times, when a person died, specially a high profile individual, they would have been burried with all their belongings. But there were no carved stone balls found in tombs from that era. Evidently, conversly to what the reading passage claims, the use of carved stone balls as a display object of social status is not a relatable hypothesis.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 280, Rule ID: PRP_RB_NO_VB[1]
Message: Are you missing a verb?
...he believes they are not plausible. Her further demostrations are as follows. Firstly, the shape o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, hence, if, second, secondly, so, thus, well, while, kind of, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 12.0772626932 25% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 22.412803532 40% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1175.0 1373.03311258 86% => OK
No of words: 239.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91631799163 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41657065462 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589958158996 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 362.7 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.0791545785 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.3846153846 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3846153846 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06452816374 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.505986348549 0.272083759551 186% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.215516952593 0.0996497079465 216% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.195402344119 0.0662205650399 295% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.323685054347 0.162205337803 200% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.120412962287 0.0443174109184 272% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.