encyclopedias
The reading and the lecturer are both about encyclopedias. While the author of the article argues that printed encyclopedias have several advantages, the lecturer disputes the claim mentioned in the article. His position is that online encyclopedias are more advantageous than traditional encyclopedias.
According to the reading, traditional encyclopedias are written by experts. The article also mentions that traditional encyclopedias are written in particular standards that nonspecialists cannot achieve. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that online encyclopedias can never be inaccurate, they are written without any mistakes whereas printed encyclopedia's error remains printed over decades.
Secondly, the author suggests online encyclopedias can be hacked, and deleted. He goes on to say that anyone can corrupt the information in the encyclopedia. The lecturer, however, asserts that online encyclopedias are not editable. No one can hack read-only privacy.
Finally, the author puts forth the idea that traditional encyclopedias are trivial. In contrast, the author’s stance is that in the traditional encyclopedias limited space is available and this is the reason it does consist of people of interest. Online encyclopedias have a great variety of topics.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 374, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'encyclopedias'' or 'encyclopedia's'?
Suggestion: encyclopedias'; encyclopedia's
...en without any mistakes whereas printed encyclopedias error remains printed over decades. Se...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, whereas, while, in contrast, in particular
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 17.0 30.3222958057 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1118.0 1373.03311258 81% => OK
No of words: 188.0 270.72406181 69% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.94680851064 5.08290768461 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70287850203 4.04702891845 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.36461293318 2.5805825403 130% => OK
Unique words: 107.0 145.348785872 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.56914893617 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 360.9 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.55342163355 122% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.0007466333 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.8571428571 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.4285714286 21.698381199 62% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.57142857143 7.06452816374 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.5032004261 0.272083759551 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.201445110457 0.0996497079465 202% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111069282109 0.0662205650399 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.333990290701 0.162205337803 206% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0496209790783 0.0443174109184 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.9 53.8541721854 61% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.64 12.2367328918 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => 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.