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 owners.
The reading asserts that carved stone balls found in Scotland are indicating three main uses in theories. The lecturer, however, challenges these ideas by pointing out some issues, and refutes them all. I will explain them in the following paragraphs.
First of all, the writer argues that those stones were used as weapons for fighting or hunting, regarding their shape. Conversely, the speaker underlines the fact that there is no evidence of such functions on the stones. Moreover, she believes no cracked signs or indication of breaking are on the surface of the stones, and their edges are well preserved.
Secondly, the reading passage claims that these stones were used as a means for measurement or weight because they are in the same size. On the contrary, the lecturer brings up the idea that since the stones are only similar in the size, and they are made from different kinds of stones such as sandstones, green stones, etc. they have different weights. therefore the stones could not have been used as weight or measure objects.
Finally, the author maintains that these carved stones may have a social function at that time, having elaborate carving on them. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that some of those carvings are very simple and do not show any specific pattern. Additionally, as a common ritual, personal possessions were barried with people in their graves, but none of these stones were found in the graves. therefore they had not any social uses.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 356, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
...ones, etc. they have different weights. therefore the stones could not have been used as ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 356, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: therefore,
...ones, etc. they have different weights. therefore the stones could not have been used as ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 19, column 423, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
... these stones were found in the graves. therefore they had not any social uses.
^^^^^^^^^
Line 19, column 423, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: therefore,
... these stones were found in the graves. therefore they had not any social uses.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, 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 : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1277.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 253.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04743083004 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98822939669 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44149784902 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600790513834 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 387.0 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
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: 44.0788370712 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.2142857143 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0714285714 21.698381199 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5714285714 7.06452816374 164% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => 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: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234417829232 0.272083759551 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0756833773946 0.0996497079465 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0594964040026 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127817276511 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.058758652278 0.0443174109184 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => 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: 11.71 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.