Dodos
Both the passage and the lecture are regarding mass extinction of dodos. Although the author accentuates that the dissappearance of dodos is due to the overhunting by humans, the lecturer utterly refutes this viewpoint, and maintains that, in fact, there are other reasons.
Firstly, the author asserts that dodos, unlike other birds, were unable to fly, so it rendered them to get hunted effortlessly. That being said, the lecturer contradicts this claim since humans didn't consider meat of dodos delicious; moreover, at the island other birds were present, and their meat was much more tasty in contrast with dodo’s, so humans had more superior option.
Secondly, from the perspective of the author, dodo’s friendliness also was one of the most vital reasons for human hunting. Dodos used to be isolated from humans, so they didn't consider humans as danger, and thus, they didn’t attempt to elude, not to mention run from humans. However, the lecturer opposes this opinion by mentioning that dodos were susceptible to animals rather than humans, so animals which were brought by new visitors contributed to the extinction of dodos.
Thirdly, the author declares that evidence was found in caves, which upholds the idea of overhunting by humans. In these caves there were a myriad of bones belonging to dodos. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts this statement by restating that animal predators eradicated habitats of dodos, and consequently, they were the core reason for death of dodos.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hat, in fact, there are other reasons. Firstly, the author asserts that dodos, ...
^^
Line 2, column 196, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...rer contradicts this claim since humans didnt consider meat of dodos delicious; moreo...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 178, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...sed to be isolated from humans, so they didnt consider humans as danger, and thus, th...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, however, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, in contrast, in fact, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1270.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 242.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2479338843 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68601398526 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590909090909 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 389.7 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.9503235539 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.0 110.228320801 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 15.4 7.06452816374 218% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More 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: 0.213126428216 0.272083759551 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.084411369303 0.0996497079465 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0871789321533 0.0662205650399 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135716767999 0.162205337803 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0844105367953 0.0443174109184 190% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.85 8.42419426049 117% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.