In 1957 a European silver coin dating to the eleventh century was discovered at a Native American archaeological site in the state of Maine in the United States. Many people believed the coin had been originally brought to North America by European explorers known as the Norse, who traveled across the Atlantic Ocean and came into contact with Native Americans almost a thousand years ago.
However, some archaeologists believe that the coin is not a genuine piece of historical evidence but a historical fake: they think that the coin was placed at the site recently by someone who wanted to mislead the public. There are three main reasons why some archaeologists believe that the coin is not genuine historical evidence.
Great Distance from Norse Settlements
First, the Native American site in Maine where the coin was discovered is located very far from other sites documenting a Norse presence in North America. Remains of Norse settlements have been discovered in far eastern Canada. The distance between the Maine site and the Norse settlements in Canada is more than a thousand kilometers, suggesting the coin has no real connection with the settlements.
No Other Coins Found
A second problem is that no other coins have been found at the Canadian sites that were inhabited by the Norse. This suggests that the Norse did not bring any silver coins with them to their North American settlements.
No Use for European Coins
Third, the Norse who traveled to North America would have understood that silver coins would most likely be useless to them. Silver coins may have been in wide use in Europe at the time, but the Norse, as experienced explorers, would have known that native North Americans did not recognize silver coins as money.
Recently, there has been a ton of debate on whether the silver coin found by archaeologists is legit or someone wanted to distract individuals by siting it. More specifically, in regard to the passage, the writer puts forth three different reasons to argue this idea. In the listening on the other hand, the lecturer is quick to point out that there are some serious flaws in the writer's claims and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each point made in the reading text.
First and foremost, the author of the article states since the Native Americans were far away from the discovery place of the coin, it is not possible to find any connection between the coin and the settlements. Some experts, however, stand in firm opposition to this claim. In the listening, for instance, the professor states that there are evidences that prove many other Americans to the north. She goes on to say that it is possible that they brought the coin to the Canada with themselves.
Furthermore, on group of scholars, represented by the writer, thinks that there were no evidences of other coins on the habitants of the Norse. Of course, though, not all experts in the field believe this is accurate. Again, the speaker specifically addresses this point when she points out that the Norse did not permanently settle in Canada. In fact, they could brought back other similar coins to Europe with themselves.
Finally, the author brings his argument to a close by suggesting that the Natives would probably found the silver coin useless because they did not recognize it as money. Not surprisingly, the lecturer takes issue with this claim by contending that the Europeans knew that Native people may probably like silver coin since they were interested in rare and beautiful properties.
To sum up, both the essayist and the professor hold conflicting views about the legitimacy of that historical exploration. It is clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on this issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 365, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'bring'
...y settle in Canada. In fact, they could brought back other similar coins to Europe with...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, for instance, in fact, of course, in regard to, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 30.3222958057 178% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1656.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 333.0 270.72406181 123% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97297297297 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61384803899 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 145.348785872 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558558558559 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 498.6 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7426803622 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.4 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2 21.698381199 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.46666666667 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198633779865 0.272083759551 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0599428940581 0.0996497079465 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587059714741 0.0662205650399 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.097683504295 0.162205337803 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0715437423782 0.0443174109184 161% => OK
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.