The article introduces the construction of the Pyramids of Giza. More specifically, the writer discusses three theories that could explain how the Egyptians built it. The lecturer in the listening passage disagrees. He believes that each has its valid points but has evident flaws, so he attacks each of the claims made in the reading.
In the reading, the author begins by stating that the external ramp theory could be possible since it would have been on one side, allowing the constructors to drag stone blocks to each level. The lecturer, however, disagrees. He states that the ramp itself would have been 1.5 km long, making it significantly longer than the pyramid, itself. He goes on to say that it would have been unpractical because of its titanic size.
The author also claims that the internal ramp view is an alternative, likewise to the first hypothesis, but located inside the structure. Again, the lecturer believes there are flaws in the writer's argument. The speaker holds that it is unlikely true due to the 90-degree angle because it would be extremely difficult to curve and would highly likely not be due to the weight and use of time.
Lastly, the article suggests that concrete casting could have been possible since they had limestone at that time, and it was a convenient way to build the architecture. The professor in the listening passage is doubtful that this is accurate. He points out that the first historical evidence of concrete casting was in Rome, which was used after 2,000 years of the pyramid piece, making it impossible to be invented or utilized in the era. Furthermore, it suggests that the stony with synthetic could have been a byproduct of modern innovation.
To sum up, both the writer and the professor hold conflicting views about the three approaches that could justify the construction of the Pyramid of Giza. It is clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on this issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 191, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ecturer believes there are flaws in the writers argument. The speaker holds that it is ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, likewise, so, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1622.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94512195122 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61239751214 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539634146341 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 492.3 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.1322127412 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.4117647059 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2941176471 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.41176470588 7.06452816374 62% => 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 : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.219977250511 0.272083759551 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0626097713291 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0538985243214 0.0662205650399 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110284479667 0.162205337803 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0460755968851 0.0443174109184 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 63.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.0 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.