Chaco Canyon
The author in the reading passage talks about the "great houses" of settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico and provides three theories about how these massive stone buildings were used in the past. However, the professor in the lecture challenges these theories.
First, the author states that Chaco houses were residential as they resemble the current apartment buildings at Taos, New Mexico. The architecture in these houses is a lot similar to more recent Southwest buildings. On the other hand, the professor disagrees with this theory. He states that there are very few fireplaces to support this theory. There were enough rooms to support the living of more than 100 people but very few fireplaces for cooking.
Second, the author claims that Chaco buildings were used as food storage. In response, the author claims that there is neither evidence of traces of maze nor the remains of any container found in which maze was kept.
Third, the author tells us that the houses were used as ceremonial centers because excavations found a mound of broken pots. In these pots, people ate food and later discarded them nearby. However, the professor disagrees with this theory, he tells us that various construction tools, building materials found in that mound. Moreover, the construction worker might have been left those pots after eating their food.
In conclusion, the author provides three theories to support the different purposes of Chaco Canyon. On the other hand, the author disagrees with all theories by providing counter theories.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 218, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...container found in which maze was kept. Third, the author tells us that the hous...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, third, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1319.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 251.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25498007968 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51653473969 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.549800796813 0.540411800872 102% => 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: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.1047595853 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.9333333333 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7333333333 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73333333333 7.06452816374 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.151288711872 0.272083759551 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0512112322432 0.0996497079465 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0962211645203 0.0662205650399 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0978766057525 0.162205337803 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0746024567397 0.0443174109184 168% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.87 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.