burning mirror
The reading mainly talks about the story of the burning mirror. The author thinks that the mirror is just a myth and the Greeks never really built this device. However, the listenning challenges what is stated in the passage through three strong reasons.
Firstly, the passage stated that the ancient Greeks's technology is not advanced enough to built such a device. The mirror should be very big and have a very precise parabolic curvation, but the Greeks can't do this at that time. On the contrary, the listenning states that dozens of small copper may form the mirror . And there may be many small mirror.
Secondly, the passage believed that it's impossible for the Greeks to set the ships on fire, because the burning mirror would take a long time to set that fire. However, in the listening, the professor thinks it's possible. It only takes 10 minutes to set wood on fire, but for other things like pitch, the mirror can set them on fire very quickly, maybe in several seconds.
Thirdly, the passage thinks that the Greeks didn't have an improvement on a weapon like burning mirror. But in the listening, it thinks this is possible. It is not the mirror that is burning, but the images in the mirror are burning.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 201, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ise parabolic curvation, but the Greeks cant do this at that time. On the contrary, ...
^^^^
Line 2, column 314, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...zens of small copper may form the mirror . And there may be many small mirror. Se...
^^
Line 4, column 45, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...dly, the passage thinks that the Greeks didnt have an improvement on a weapon like bu...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, may, really, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1005.0 1373.03311258 73% => OK
No of words: 214.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.69626168224 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.28354567603 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 111.0 145.348785872 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.518691588785 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 299.7 419.366225166 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.0264481643 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 77.3076923077 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4615384615 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.38461538462 7.06452816374 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.384612782988 0.272083759551 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144812929684 0.0996497079465 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130366377696 0.0662205650399 197% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.256270720834 0.162205337803 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0926623330038 0.0443174109184 209% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.9 13.3589403974 67% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 53.8541721854 134% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.68 12.2367328918 79% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.94 8.42419426049 82% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 63.6247240618 53% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
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.