Both reading and listening discussed an animal which lived 15o million years ago and known as Pepenonamus robustus. According to the reading first researchment shows that it is a hunter dinosaur. But when you analyze closely evidence speaks different. The reading state that this animal is a hunter and provide several reason of it. However, The speaker claims it is a fallacy and refutes each author’s reasons.
First of all, Robostus which was much smaller than psittacosaurs was size about domestic cat like any other animal which lived at that time. It is not possible to hunt psittacosaurrs or other dinasours for robustus because of its size. On the contrary, the speaker claims that you can say that small size animals can not hunt bigger than themselves. Moreover, these animals bigger than baby dinosaur.
Secondly, article pose that Robustus are more able to scavenging than hunting. Moreover, Features such as size and hunting position show that it does not run after prey and psittacousaurs were an animal who run fast. In contrast, these speaker proclaims that even today there are examples of animals such as have same leg position for instance tasmania devil. This animals can run at high speeds and hunter.
Lastly, One can consider that it is not a prey which actively hunted due to remains of dinosaur bones inside the stomache. There must be some teet mark at the bones of animal that was eaten. Conversely, the speaker opposed it and said that this animal did not use it for shewing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 149, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun reason seems to be countable; consider using: 'several reasons'.
Suggestion: several reasons
...hat this animal is a hunter and provide several reason of it. However, The speaker claims it i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 45, Rule ID: AN_ANOTHER[1]
Message: One of these determiners is redundant in this context. Choose only one: 'an evidence' or 'another evidence'.
Suggestion: an evidence; another evidence
...ndly, article pose that leg features is an another evidence. It seem that these animals can scaveng...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 69, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'seems'?
Suggestion: seems
...leg features is an another evidence. It seem that these animals can scavenging than ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 204, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this speaker' or 'these speakers'?
Suggestion: this speaker; these speakers
... did not chase after prey. In contrast, these speaker proclaims that even today there are exa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 292, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'legged'.
Suggestion: legged
...e examples of animals such as have same leg position for instance tasmania devil. T...
^^^
Line 4, column 334, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: These
...g position for instance tasmania devil. This animals can run at high speeds and hunt...
^^^^
Line 6, column 50, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
...ast evidence is absence of teeth marks. there are no teeth marks at the bone which f...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 92, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ere are no teeth marks at the bone which found at the stomach of robustus. Robust...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, first, furthermore, however, lastly, moreover, second, secondly, so, for instance, in contrast, such as, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 17.0 30.3222958057 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1062.0 1373.03311258 77% => OK
No of words: 221.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.80542986425 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85565412703 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40786063508 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.58371040724 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 328.5 419.366225166 78% => 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: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 12.0 21.2450331126 56% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.3394302143 49.2860985944 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 59.0 110.228320801 54% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 12.2777777778 21.698381199 57% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 8.11111111111 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 15.0 4.27373068433 351% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.102929073136 0.272083759551 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0382656330956 0.0996497079465 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0713407161671 0.0662205650399 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0719668282127 0.162205337803 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0546476977439 0.0443174109184 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.4 13.3589403974 55% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.76 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 11.0289183223 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.73 12.2367328918 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.45 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 63.6247240618 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 6.8 10.498013245 65% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.2008830022 62% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.