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.
Recently, there has been a ton of debates as to the possible purpose of carved stones found in Scotland. More specifically, regarding the passage, the writer puts forth the idea that there some theories about their meaning. In the listening passage, the lecturer is quick to point out there are some serious flaws in the writer's claims. The professor believes that none of the three theories in the reading passage are very convincing, and addresses, in detail the trouble with the points made in the reading passage.
First and foremost, the author of the reading states that the stone balls were weapons. Some professionals in the same field, however, stand infirm opposition to this claim. In the listening, for example, the professor states that if the stone balls used as weapons for hunting or fighting, its surface would be cracked. He goes on to say that the ball stones' surfaces which found are well preserved without any cracking.
One group of scholars, represented by the writer, think that the stones could have been used as a standard to measure quantities for trade purposes. Of course, though, not all experts in this field believe this is accurate. Again, the speaker specifically addresses this point when he states the ball stones were made from different types of stones and each type has a different density which makes it unlikely that stones were part of a primitive system.
Finally, the author wraps his argument by positing that the ball stones could have been used as an indication for the social status of their owners. Not surprisingly, the lecturer takes this issue with his claim by contending that ancient people buried dead people with their propositions. However, none of the ball stones found in graves or tombs which means that these stones are not kind of propositions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 409, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...se stones are not kind of propositions.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, regarding, so, well, as to, for example, kind of, of course
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 : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1522.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 303.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02310231023 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51290605002 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547854785479 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 453.6 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.4119097418 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.714285714 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6428571429 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.28571428571 7.06452816374 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178823240708 0.272083759551 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0612366118292 0.0996497079465 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0656829959495 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10643127807 0.162205337803 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.035979233202 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25 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.