The main idea of both the reading and the lecture is about handwritten book on vellum. The author of the text, by providing three theories, tries to explain the origin of these mysterious scripts, however, the lecturer opposes these theories and states that none of the people mentioned in the reading are author of the script for the following reasons.
First of all, the author of the passage points out that manuscript convey special information and scientific materials and Anthony Ascham is identified as the author of the scripts because illustrations in the book are similar to his book on medicinal plants. On the other hand, the professor rejects this theory by saying that Anthony Ascham was an ordinary scientist and other sources contain these plants illustrations too. Consequently, the author of the scripts is not Anthony Ascham.
Second of all, the writer of the article avers that the manuscript created by Edward Kelley and he was selling the fake text of it to nobles. The speaker, conversely, rebuts this notion too and declares that it is unlikely that Edward Kelley made the scripts and sell them to people because in 15th century it was easy to fool people and simple script would suit this goal. Hence, there were no reason to make this complex code to fool other people.
Thirdly, the writer of the article brings about the manuscript created by Wilfrid M. Voynich himself because he was familiar with old manuscripts and created to sell them. The professor, on the contrary, refutes this also by saying that the ink in these scripts are 400 years old. Even if Wilfrid M. Voynich made the scripts how he managed to use this old ink on the scripts. As a result, this is unlikely that Wilfrid M. Voynich created manuscripts himself.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 281, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[2]
Message: “Even if” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ink in these scripts are 400 years old. Even if Wilfrid M. Voynich made the scripts how...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, first, hence, however, if, second, so, third, thirdly, as a result, first of all, on the contrary, 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: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => 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: 1461.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4722706612 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 430.2 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.2484016375 49.2860985944 157% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.4 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.2 7.06452816374 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174241942424 0.272083759551 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0708269379823 0.0996497079465 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0613956152776 0.0662205650399 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0964362585904 0.162205337803 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.051133149219 0.0443174109184 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.