The reading and the lecture are both about Claudus's reign period. The author of the article feels that the emperor Claudius deserves some praise for all his achievements and personal character. The lecturer disputes the claims made in the article. His position is that Claudius definitely has a weak side as a leader.
According to the reading, Claudius was a genius and innovative. The article mentions that Britain was incorporated into the Roman Empire during his reign. Moreover, he created laws that gave some rights to enslaved people and built a new harbor. The lecturer challenges this argument. He claims that Claudius definitely did something good in his reign, but he also made a big mistake when he assassinated the previous emperor. Additionally, he points out that people did the same thing to him at the end of his reign.
Secondly, the author suggests that Claudius was a wise and fair judge. In the article, it is said that he was not biased towards the senate. The lecturer, however, asserts that Claudius was a terrible judge. He says that he did not listen to both sides during judging and making decisions.
Finally, the author posits that Claudius gave opportunities to new people during his reign. The author contends that Claudius gave the formerly enslaved people and women the chance to make political decisions. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is the former slaves were corrupt and accepted bribes, and his wives were untrustworthy and it was clear when one of his wives poisoned him with mushroom.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 195, 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.
...is achievements and personal character. The lecturer disputes the claims made in th...
^^^
Line 7, column 228, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...e political decisions. In contrast, the lecturers stance is the former slaves were corrup...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => 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: 1282.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 255.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02745098039 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60835908209 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.533333333333 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 391.5 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.679561963 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.4117647059 110.228320801 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.0 21.698381199 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.23529411765 7.06452816374 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186356389743 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0656363294825 0.0996497079465 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0484743303659 0.0662205650399 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118469768616 0.162205337803 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0198093860172 0.0443174109184 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.8 13.3589403974 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.3 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.