The author states the reasons of why some archaeologists believe that the coin that Native American found, which was dated on 17th century is not genuine historical evidence. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three reasons do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that the great distance from Norse Settelements to the current place where the coin was found is more than a thousand kilometers,suggesting that the coin has no real connection with the settelments. On the contrary, the lecturer cannot disagree more, reasoning that archaeologists have found many other objects that have come that far. Apart from that, people were very interested for foreign objects not just for the coins. As a result, the coins should have be an historical evidence.
The second argument the author gives is that the NOrse did not bring any silver coins with them to their North American settelments. Therefore, they cannot say that coins a convincing historical evidence. However, the professor cannot be more outrages, explaining that people moved so often so they took their coins with them back to Europe. So, this mean that they brought those coins back to the North American settelments again, once they came back.
Lastly, on one hand, the reading passage points out that the Norse who traveled to North America would have understood that silver coins would most likely be useless to them. Consequently, they did not recognize coins as money. Nevertheless, the lecturer declares that the Norse new that North American were interested in foreign objects. So, they might have been treading things with them, As long as they found beautiful and attractive, they used coins.
The author states the reasons of why some archaeologists believe that the coin that Native American found, which was dated on 17th century is not genuine historical evidence. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three reasons do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that the great distance from Norse Settelements to the current place where the coin was found is more than a thousand kilometers,suggesting that the coin has no real connection with the settelments. On the contrary, the lecturer cannot disagree more, reasoning that archaeologists have found many other objects that have come that far. Apart from that, people were very interested for foreign objects not just for the coins. As a result, the coins should have be an historical evidence.
The second argument the author gives is that the NOrse did not bring any silver coins with them to their North American settelments. Therefore, they cannot say that coins a convincing historical evidence. However, the professor cannot be more outrages, explaining that people moved so often so they took their coins with them back to Europe. So, this mean that they brought those coins back to the North American settelments again, once they came back.
Lastly, on one hand, the reading passage points out that the Norse who traveled to North America would have understood that silver coins would most likely be useless to them. Consequently, they did not recognize coins as money. Nevertheless, the lecturer declares that the Norse new that North American were interested in foreign objects. So, they might have been treading things with them, As long as they found beautiful and attractive, they used coins.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 169, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , suggesting
...found is more than a thousand kilometers,suggesting that the coin has no real connection wi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 501, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...ins. As a result, the coins should have be an historical evidence. The second a...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, apart from, as a result, on the contrary
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 : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 22.0 12.0772626932 182% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 22.412803532 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1472.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 282.0 270.72406181 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21985815603 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73569552004 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556737588652 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 432.0 419.366225166 103% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
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: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.8507458411 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.142857143 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1428571429 21.698381199 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.337785014341 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123582310754 0.0996497079465 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.177160920701 0.0662205650399 268% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.278608716263 0.162205337803 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.318227730365 0.0443174109184 718% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.71 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => 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.