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.
Both the reading and lecture discuss how the prominent the Chaco Canyon building were used in the past. The former argues that there are the Chaco structures were used by families for three reasons, but latter challenges each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage asserts that the Chaco great houses were used as residential purposes by a lots of people around hundreds. However, the professor in the lecture counters that this reasons does not hold true. If that building were houses of many people then there should have many fire places, but there was only few fire places where one can guess that there might be around 10 families.
Secondly, according to the passage, expert opined that Chaco building were used to store diverse cereals crop such as maize. In contrast, the lecture objects this idea because to store the food grains there should have big containers. Moreover, he further contends that this reason is not feasible there were not any maze on the floor of the building if actually there used to store food supplies.
Finally, the passage claims that
Nevertheless, like two reasons before, the professor in his lecture proclaims that this reason is not feasible because He supports his argument by presenting example of he supports his argument by presenting example of
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 114, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a lot' or simply 'lots'?
Suggestion: a lot; lots
...es were used as residential purposes by a lots of people around hundreds. However, th...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, then, in contrast, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1099.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 220.0 270.72406181 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99545454545 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.32767663398 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.55 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 335.7 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 47.3273339964 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.111111111 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4444444444 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.4444444444 7.06452816374 204% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.122552858832 0.272083759551 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0574117541032 0.0996497079465 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0465110919831 0.0662205650399 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0616336750455 0.162205337803 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578913752788 0.0443174109184 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.3589403974 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 63.6247240618 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.