With the contrast of the reading passage, which emphasizes that coin found in Native America is a fake thing for misleading them, the professor in her lecture says that this news is not fake. He casts doubt each and every point made by text to bolster their position.
First of all, the reading passage claims that there was no opportunity to travel a great distance from Norse to America. On the other hand, the speaker rebuts this point because without coin, they have found many objects in Native America which were originated far away from this place, so it might be helpful to understand that distance is not a big issue for them that time. Moreover, there is a huge possibility that Native American could reach that place and carried a coin with them while returning their home.
Secondly, according to text, it is true that there was no use of coin which will support this coin issue. However, the professor negates this by saying maybe Norse came to America with no wish of permanent settlement. Thus, when they had backed to their country, packed all their valuable things. Consequently, archaeologists found a few coins instead of many.
Thirdly, the reading passage describes that in Native America there was no use of such coin. Meanwhile, the professor refutes this evidence because American were not used money as we do now. It might be very appealing to them for its beauty. Additionally, they could use it as ornaments and found this could interesting.
As a result, all above-mentioned evidence is provided by the professor enough to cancel the text claims.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 309, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'interest'
Suggestion: interest
...se it as ornaments and found this could interesting. As a result, all above-mentioned e...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, however, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, while, as a result, first of all, it is true, 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: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 22.412803532 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1318.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 269.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89962825279 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55215223268 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565055762082 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 407.7 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => 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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.1579723689 49.2860985944 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.1428571429 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2142857143 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.2142857143 7.06452816374 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.144188092293 0.272083759551 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0523285914832 0.0996497079465 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0484270179351 0.0662205650399 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0774563586617 0.162205337803 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457105338155 0.0443174109184 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.4 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 63.6247240618 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.