he archaeologist proposed that vessels were ancient electric batteries and even demonstrated that they can produce a small electric current when filled with some liquids
In this set of material, the reading section states that it is not likely that the vessels were actually used as electric batteries in ancient times and provides three reasons to support. However, the lecturer explains that those reasons are not convincing and rejects them.
The author claims that there was not any wire near the vessels so they could not be used as batteries. The professor opposes this point by saying that those vessels were found by local people not trained archeologists. So, it is possible that they throw away because it was not interesting for them.
In the passage, as a second reason mentioned that, the constituent of the vessels was the same as those which discovered in the ruins of Seleucia, an ancient city located nearby. They were used for holding scrolls of sacred texts, not for generating electricity. On contrary, the man said it was true but it is not proof that they did not produce power. First produced batteries used for preserving scrolls, but it is possible they would have other uses.
And as the last reason, the passage mentioned that there were not any devices that relied on electricity so, what could ancient people have done with the electricity that the vessels were supposed to have generated? The lecturer said that vessels had a mild shock that can heal muscle ache or any pain or shown as a magic power.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 300, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ecause it was not interesting for them. In the passage, as a second reason menti...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, second, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 16.0 30.3222958057 53% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1129.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 236.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.78389830508 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91947592106 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42971806522 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 145.348785872 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.542372881356 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 347.4 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => 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: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.3719249123 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.636363636 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4545454545 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.72727272727 7.06452816374 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
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 : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.228725420391 0.272083759551 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.080403409143 0.0996497079465 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0584892441903 0.0662205650399 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138351466685 0.162205337803 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0416321983121 0.0443174109184 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.44 12.2367328918 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 63.6247240618 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.