Both the reading and the listening are about whether the United States companies should produce ecocertified wood or not. The author states that producing eco-friendly wood will not be efficient, while the speaker has the opposite view. The inconsistency of the opinions are provided in the following paragraphs.
First of all, the author claims that American customers are not tended to believe advertising in general. However, the lecturer thinks that US citizens do not believe the companies which make ads for themselves. To put it different, Americans do prone to believe to independent organization's certification, which has international reputation.
Secondly, in the reading part states that eco wood would be more expensive on account of the certification. Therefore, Americans will not buy the same product purchasing higher price. In this sense, US companies would prefer not to enhance product price nor obtain that very ecocertification. On the contrary, the speaker claims that the price change will be not more than five percent. As a result, consumers would rather choose ecologically certified product.
Thirdly, the author assumes that American wood companies are manufacturing mostly for local consumers. Moreover, following that very certification will be more profitable for the companies which target market is abroad. In contrast, from the lecturer's point the American companies have to pursue ecocertification inasmuch as the competitor foreign companies. In other words, would the local companies not be eco-friendly, the foreign ones will occupy the US market.
In conclusion, it can be observed that different factors make this contradictory of the viewpoints. The author believes that ecocertification is not beneficial for the US wood producing industry, while the speaker quite reasonably casts doubt on this view pointing out the benefits.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 279, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'organizations'' or 'organization's'?
Suggestion: organizations'; organization's
...cans do prone to believe to independent organizations certification, which has international ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...eign ones will occupy the US market. In conclusion, it can be observed that dif...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, while, in conclusion, in contrast, in general, as a result, first of all, in other words, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1604.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 283.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66784452297 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17903786727 2.5805825403 123% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547703180212 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 498.6 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.55342163355 116% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 25.2242537209 49.2860985944 51% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 94.3529411765 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6470588235 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.8235294118 7.06452816374 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.27373068433 281% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191532754466 0.272083759551 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0607269035607 0.0996497079465 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0420981180245 0.0662205650399 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100073831557 0.162205337803 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0461627682216 0.0443174109184 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 53.8541721854 71% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.31 12.2367328918 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.