33-1
The reading passage introduces different theories about the purposes and meaning of carved stone. While the professor refuses this theory and claims that these theories are unconvincing.
Firstly, although, the text opines that carve stones were weapons used in hunting and fighting, the professor believes that this kind of stone were broken up easily and after that other type of weapon had been common such as arrow for fighting or hunting purpose.
Secondly, the lecture claims that they were used as a part of a primitive system of weights and measures. Controversy, the professor elucidates that they had different uniforms; thus they have various density and they were not appropriate for measuring systems.
Eventually, though, the lecture claims that the third theory is related to using this stone as a social purpose, the professor opines that they were extremely simple and any kinds of them have never been found in graves. Therefore, we cannot conclude that they were used as personal positions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 294, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t they were used as personal positions.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thus, while, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.48453608247 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 4.92783505155 20% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 5.05154639175 158% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 3.03092783505 297% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 21.0 32.9175257732 64% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 26.3917525773 45% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 0.0 3.85567010309 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 853.0 937.175257732 91% => OK
No of words: 162.0 206.0 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26543209877 4.54256449028 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.56762134501 3.78020617076 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50115809177 2.54303337028 98% => OK
Unique words: 98.0 127.690721649 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.604938271605 0.622605031667 97% => OK
syllable_count: 263.7 290.88556701 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.41237113402 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 9.13402061856 11% => OK
Article: 7.0 0.824742268041 849% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.83505154639 54% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.463917525773 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 1.44329896907 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 12.6804123711 55% => 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: 23.0 16.3608247423 141% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 67.7166967624 44.8134815571 151% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.857142857 76.5299724578 159% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1428571429 16.8248392259 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.7142857143 4.34317383033 293% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.29896907216 93% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 2.54639175258 39% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 7.41237113402 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.49484536082 134% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.94845360825 127% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.216113520407 0% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0766984524023 0% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0603063233224 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.12726935374 0% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0580467560999 0% => 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: 15.0 8.37731958763 179% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 70.7449484536 68% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 3.82989690722 81% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 7.45979381443 165% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 8.71597938144 156% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 7.59969072165 123% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 41.2886597938 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 8.62886597938 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 8.54432989691 131% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 8.15463917526 135% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.