Carved stone balls are a curious type of artifact found at a number of |locations in Scotland. They date from the late Neolithic period, around 4,000 years ago. They are round in shape; they were carved from several types of stone; most are about 70 mm in diameter; and many are ornamented to some degree. Archaeologists do not agree about their purpose and meaning, but there are several theories.
One theory is that the carved stone balls were weapons used in hunting or fighting. Some of the stone balls have been found with holes in them, and many have grooves on the surface. It is possible that a cord was strung through the holes or laid in the grooves around the ball. Holding the stone balls at the end of the cord would have allowed a person to swing it around or throw it.
A second theory is that the carved stone balls were used as part of a primitive system of weights and measures. The fact that they are so nearly uniform in size - at 70 mm in diameter-suggests that the balls were interchangeable and represented some standard unit of measure. They could have been used as standard weights to measure quantities of grain or other food, or anything that needed to be measured by weight on a balance or scale for the purpose of trade.
A third theory is that the carved stone balls served a social purpose as opposed to a practical or utilitarian one. This view is supported by the fact that many stone balls have elaborate designs. The elaborate carving suggests that the stones may have marked the important social status of their owner
The reading and the lecture are both about carved stone ball, which is an artifact found in Scotland. The author of the reading presented three theories about the carved stone. The lecturer on the listening passage feels that those theories are unconvincing and these are the following points.
Firstly, the author points out the first theory that carved stone balls were weapons used in hunting or fighting. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She says that the stone does not have any wear and tear and there should be some cracks or broken pieces of stone if it was actually used for hunting or fighting. Furthermore, she suggest that all those stones found was well preserved without any damage.
Secondly, the article contends that carved stone balls were used as early system of weights and measures. The lecturer rebuts this theory. She suggests that the carved stones were not in uniform masses because they were made of different materials like sandstone or quartz, so they differed in density also.
Thirdly, the author states the third theory that carved stone use as a status symbol of society because of their elaborated designs. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that there is some inconsistency in this theory also. This is because the designs were too simple patterns to be considered as symbol of their status.. She puts forth the idea that none of the carved stone were found on the tomb or grave of elite people as they keep valuable belongings on the grave while they die.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 178, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... three theories about the carved stone. The lecturer on the listening passage feels...
^^^
Line 3, column 337, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'she' must be used with a third-person verb: 'suggests'.
Suggestion: suggests
...r hunting or fighting. Furthermore, she suggest that all those stones found was well pr...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 303, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
... or quartz, so they differed in density also. Thirdly, the author states the thir...
^^^^
Line 7, column 222, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...re is some inconsistency in this theory also. This is because the designs were too s...
^^^^
Line 7, column 323, Rule ID: DOUBLE_PUNCTUATION
Message: Two consecutive dots
Suggestion: .
... be considered as symbol of their status.. She puts forth the idea that none of t...
^^
Line 7, column 354, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ir status.. She puts forth the idea that none of the carved stone were found on t...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, well, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1257.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 257.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89105058366 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.27640094041 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.544747081712 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 382.5 419.366225166 91% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.9939408676 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.7857142857 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3571428571 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.71428571429 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.269283366064 0.272083759551 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0935079813409 0.0996497079465 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0828895879174 0.0662205650399 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174506211771 0.162205337803 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0389615057543 0.0443174109184 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.3589403974 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.