TPO-25 - Integrated Writing Task 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 jay contained a copper cylin
Both passage and lecture discuss a vessel that was found by villagers constructing a railroad in Iraq, which is attributed to be a ancient electric batteries. The writer brings up the idea that this things it is unlikely that these things used as electric batteries, however, the speaker rejects the claim made in the passage.
Firstly, the professor argues that vessels was discovered by local people and villagers and they might find something that local people though that they are unimportant because these people did not train, hence threw away them. So, it is probable that in the area that villagers discovered wires and other conductors exists. By contrast, the author brings up a point that there is not any evidence of metal wires and conductors near excavated areas and thus, clay jars are not electric batteries.
Secondly, the lecturer states that it is true that copper cylinders look like the same as Seleucia, who used copper for holding scrolls, but this is not proved at all. She continues by stating that it is likely that firstly, ancient people utilized copper cylinders for holding scrolls and then they used in iron rods in order to produce electricity. Therefore, the ancient people utilized copper cylinder at first for one purpose and then, they adapted them to another aim. On the contrary, the author of passage believes that copper cylinders inside jars were used same as Seleucia, which was ancient city located nearby for holding scrolls.
Finally, although the writer claims that electric batteries were useless for ancient people because there were not any devices that replied on electricity, the speaker challenges this claim by saying that ancient people use electric current for creating mild shocks and tringling sensation. It is argued in the lecture that ancient people used electricity for convincing that they have magical power. Additionally, the professor points out that like modern medicine, ancient people make use of electric current for the healing of ailments and releasing sick people form pains, hence the electricity was useful for ancient people in the past time.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 130, 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
...road in Iraq, which is attributed to be a ancient electric batteries. The writer ...
^
Line 1, column 149, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'batterie', 'battery'?
Suggestion: batterie; battery
... is attributed to be a ancient electric batteries. The writer brings up the idea that thi...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 195, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ies. The writer brings up the idea that this things it is unlikely that these things...
^^^^
Line 4, column 636, Rule ID: PAST_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'pastime'?
Suggestion: pastime
...ty was useful for ancient people in the past time.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, hence, however, look, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, it is true, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 9.8082437276 10% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 11.0286738351 209% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 38.0 43.0788530466 88% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 52.1666666667 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 2.0 8.0752688172 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1779.0 1977.66487455 90% => OK
No of words: 344.0 407.700716846 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.17151162791 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.48103885553 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47160558486 2.67179642975 93% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 212.727598566 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.502906976744 0.524837075471 96% => OK
syllable_count: 548.1 618.680645161 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 9.0 3.08781362007 291% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.94265232975 40% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 20.6003584229 58% => 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: 28.0 20.1344086022 139% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 53.7434104488 48.9658058833 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.25 100.406767564 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.6666666667 20.6045352989 139% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3333333333 5.45110844103 190% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 11.8709677419 17% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0709690394775 0.236089414692 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0358889605724 0.076458572812 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0382353313515 0.0737576698707 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0545739588086 0.150856017488 36% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0314024242614 0.0645574589148 49% => 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: 17.3 11.7677419355 147% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 58.1214874552 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.1575268817 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.3 10.9000537634 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 86.8835125448 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.002688172 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.0537634409 131% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.247311828 137% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.