As early as the twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their "great houses," massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand three or four stories high. Archaeologists have been trying to determine how the buildings were used. While there is still no universally agreed upon explanation, there are three competing theories.
One theory holds that the Chaco structures were purely residential, with each housing hundreds of people. Supporters of this theory have interpreted Chaco great houses as earlier versions of the architecture seen in more recent Southwest societies. In particular, the Chaco houses appear strikingly similar to the large, well-known "apartment buildings" at Taos, New Mexico, in which many people have been living for centuries.
A second theory contends that the Chaco structures were used to store food supplies. One of the main crops of the Chaco people was grain maize, which could be stored for long periods of time without spoiling and could serve as a long-lasting supply of food. The supplies of maize had to be stored somewhere, and the size of the great houses would make them very suitable for the purpose.
A third theory proposes that houses were used as ceremonial centers. Close to one house, called Pueblo Alto, archaeologists identified an enormous mound formed by a pile of old material. Excavations of the mound revealed deposits containing a surprisingly large number of broken pots. This finding has been interpreted as evidence that people gathered at Pueblo Alto for special ceremonies. At the ceremonies, they ate festive meals and then discarded the pots in which the meals had been prepared or served. Such ceremonies have been documented for other Native American cultures.
The main topic of both the passage and the lecture is theories of how the Chaco great houses are used. According to the passage there are three competing theories. However, the professor finds the idea questionable, citing three reasons to repudiate all the theories mentioned in the passage.
First, the passage mentions a theory that proposes that the huge buildings were residential, housing hundreds of people. The passage introduce the buildings as old versions of recent apartment buildings. However the lecturer repudiates the theory by pointing out that although from the outside they resemble apartments, there are strong evidences inside that cast doubt on being residential. He explains that there are not enough fire places for accommodating that population in it. there are enough fire place for about ten families but enough space for more than one hundred families.
Second, the passage suggests that the buildings probably were used for storing food supplies especially grain maize. On the other hand, the professor maintains that although this theory sounds plausible, there is not enough evidence. If the buildings were used as an store, maize and big containers of it should be found in the excavations. So, that cannot be acceptable because there is no evidence of containers or maize.
Third, the passage asserts that the houses were used as ceremonial centers. The author proves this suggestion by making the point that excavations revealed a large number or old material like broken pots. On the Contrary the lecturer refutes the last theory by explaining that the excavations revealed many other material that reject this theory. Building material like sand, rock and also construction tools suggest that the place was used for piling construction trash. The professors further describes that the broken pots may be left from the meals of the workers and have nothing to do with social gatherings.
flaws:
No. of Words: 307 250 //there are some duplicated content
there are enough fire place for about ten families but enough space for more than one hundred families.
there are enough fire place for about ten families but not enough space for more than one hundred families.
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 24 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 16 12
No. of Words: 307 250
No. of Characters: 1583 1200
No. of Different Words: 167 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.186 4.2
Average Word Length: 5.156 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.555 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 89 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.188 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.897 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.546 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.084 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4