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.
Both the passage and the lecture discuss about the purpose and meaning of the carved stone balls in the Neolithic period. The passage suggests three theories to explain the purpose and meaning. However, the lecture casts doubt on the authenticity of the theories mentioned in the passage.
First of all, the passage claims that the carved stone balls could be used as weapons in hunting or fighting. Since some of the stone balls have holes in them, and some have grooves on the surface, it is possible that a cord was strung through the holes or laid in the grooves around the ball, so that people could swing around or throw it. Nevertheless, the lecture refutes the passage by mentioning that weapons in Neolithic period were usually cracked or broken off, yet the carved stone balls are well preserved. Thus, this theory can be dismissed.
Secondly, the passage mentions that the carved stone balls were used as part of a primitive system of weights and measures. Since they are so nearly uniform in size, they could have been used as standard to measure weight. Notwithstanding, the lecture counters the passage by arguing that the masses of the stone balls vary considerably. Because the stone balls were made in different types of stone, and each of them has different density. Therefore, it is unlikely that they could be used as measurement.
Finally, the passage states that the carved stone balls might serve a social purpose, since many stone balls have elaborate designs. But the lecture disagrees with the passage by pointing out that some of them have intricate pattern, yet other are simple. Moreover, archaeologists have not found any stone balls in the high ranked people's, who died in the Neolithic period, graves.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 117, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...s weapons in hunting or fighting. Since some of the stone balls have holes in them, and som...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 150, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: uniform
... and measures. Since they are so nearly uniform in size, they could have been used as standard ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, well, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1453.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97602739726 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47970510704 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0678265102 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8666666667 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4666666667 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.06666666667 7.06452816374 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.254777984229 0.272083759551 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0934877522456 0.0996497079465 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0652883499102 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162733895681 0.162205337803 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0494297697034 0.0443174109184 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.