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 ball 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 passage propose that carved stone balls found in various place in Scotland had some specefic application. However archeologist does not agree on the matter of usage of those stones, but there are 3 main theory introduce the application of the stone balls. In the contrary, the professor refute all theories and cast doubt about all of the mentioned applications.
Firstly, the reading states that carved stones were utilized as weapon. It proposes that maybe those balls were used for hunting or fighting due to the holes found in some of the stones. However the lecturuer rejects this idea and asserts that, if those balls were used as weapons, there should be some specific signs on that. As an example she mentions that, some weapons such as arrows have sign of ware or crack on them, but she argues that there is no sign of crack or broken peices in those balls, in contrast, the surface of the balls are well preserved and there is no or just little damage on them.
Secondly, the passage mention that maybe those carved stones were utilized as a system to measure things due to the fact that they are in the same size. On the other hand, the lecturer mention that, although those balls have uniform size, but they do not have same weigh which makes them useless for measurement system. She argues that, those balls are have considerebly different weight because they are made of different materials. She asserts that some balls are made of sand and other made of court side or green stones wich makes them different in weight. Since they are not in the same weight, so they were not used in the primitive weight system.
Finally, the reading passage asserts that, those carved stones possibbly were used as a statue which marked the statues of its owner. On the contrary, the professor demise this idea due to some strong reasons. She asserts that, althogh some stones had intriqut pattern but most of them were simple which could not been used as statue. Moreover, she mentions that, if a high rank person dies in the past, the stones would have been buried in its grave because it was the property of that person. However, there is no sign of those balls in the grave or thumb of celebrated person which fortify the professors assumption that they were not used as a statue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 119, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...Scotland had some specefic application. However archeologist does not agree on the matt...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 341, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...efute all theories and cast doubt about all of the mentioned applications. Firstly, the...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 168, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...g or fighting due to the holes found in some of the stones. However the lecturuer rejects t...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 188, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... the holes found in some of the stones. However the lecturuer rejects this idea and ass...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 574, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...e balls are well preserved and there is no or just little damage on them. Secon...
^^
Line 5, column 266, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'weighed'.
Suggestion: weighed
...uniform size, but they do not have same weigh which makes them useless for measuremen...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 354, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...ystem. She argues that, those balls are have considerebly different weight because t...
^^^^
Line 5, column 518, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'stones'' or 'stone's'?
Suggestion: stones'; stone's
...d and other made of court side or green stones wich makes them different in weight. Si...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 541, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: different
...rt side or green stones wich makes them different in weight. Since they are not in the same weight,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 598, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
... of celebrated person which fortify the professors assumption that they were not used as a...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, well, in contrast, such as, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 10.4613686534 210% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 12.0772626932 174% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 22.412803532 219% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1900.0 1373.03311258 138% => OK
No of words: 404.0 270.72406181 149% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.70297029703 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48327461151 4.04702891845 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.22100196322 2.5805825403 86% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.450495049505 0.540411800872 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 590.4 419.366225166 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.5143613975 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.764705882 110.228320801 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7647058824 21.698381199 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35294117647 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 4.19205298013 239% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.179927824799 0.272083759551 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0742658967164 0.0996497079465 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0509667721449 0.0662205650399 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119726623732 0.162205337803 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0308641585924 0.0443174109184 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.28 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.67 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 63.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.0 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.