The reading states that there are several reasons that the archaeologist proposed that vessels were ancient electric batteries and even demonstrated that they can produce a small electric current when filled with some liquid, but it is not likely that the vessels were used as batteries. On the other hand, the lecturer finds all the reasons mentioned by the reading dubious and refutes them all by specific details.
First, the reading states that if the vessels were used as batteries, they would probably have been attached to some electricity conductor such as metal wires, but there is no evidence to prove this idea. On the contrary, the professor mentioned the fact that the wires were invented by local people, not archaeologists, so they could use another material.
Furthermore, the author argues that no scrolls were found inside the jars can be explained by the fact that the scrolls simply disintegrated over the centuries. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that we believe people in the past used copper cylinders for one purpose, but they could use them for another reason that is not more ap for us until now.
Finally, the reading passage holds the view that people in the past had no devices that relied on electricity. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that batteries could use for healing, and nowadays everyone can say they have magical power.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, if, so, in contrast, such as, on the contrary, 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: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => 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: 1171.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 235.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9829787234 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54623164871 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.570212765957 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 363.6 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.9398690795 49.2860985944 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.375 110.228320801 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.375 21.698381199 135% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.75 7.06452816374 195% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0421596494002 0.272083759551 15% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0182248598773 0.0996497079465 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0156084640297 0.0662205650399 24% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0263001026798 0.162205337803 16% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00785395913235 0.0443174109184 18% => 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: 16.7 13.3589403974 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 53.8541721854 94% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.2 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.