The reading and the lecture are both about carved stone balls and how they were used. The author of the reading believes that they were used for many things such as weights, social status, and weapons. The lecturer casts doubts made on the claims made in the article. She thinks that the weapons were not used for any of these things.
First of all, the author mentions that the balls were used as weapons. It is mentioned that the balls had grooves or holes in it, which suggest that there wer strings strung into the ball. This shows us that the people held onto the end of the cord and swung the ball around. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She says the balls could not have been used as weapons. She adds that the balls would have had chips or cracks on them if they were used as weapons, but they do not.
Secondly, the author contends that the balls were used as weights. The article notes that the size and weight of the balls prove that they were used as a measuring and weighing device. The lecturer rebuts this argument. She suggest the balls could not have been used as weights, because of the type of rock. Each rock had a different type of rock, so there was no way it could have been used for weighing because of the density of the different rocks.
Finally, the author states that the balls were used as a social purpose. The article establishes that the balls all had carvings that showed the social status of the owner of the ball. The lecturer on the other hand, posits that some balls have intricate patterns, but most have very simple carvings. She also mentions that the dead people, did not have a ball with them, as most dead important people would have in their grave.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 203, 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.
...as weights, social status, and weapons. The lecturer casts doubts made on the claim...
^^^
Line 5, column 225, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'She' must be used with a third-person verb: 'suggests'.
Suggestion: suggests
... The lecturer rebuts this argument. She suggest the balls could not have been used as w...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, if, second, secondly, so, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
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: 1400.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 314.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.45859872611 5.08290768461 88% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 1.95015787696 2.5805825403 76% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.464968152866 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 408.6 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.55342163355 84% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.8740662414 49.2860985944 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 73.6842105263 110.228320801 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5263157895 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.89473684211 7.06452816374 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172806192167 0.272083759551 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627408020819 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0596254161962 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11773710792 0.162205337803 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0267557482221 0.0443174109184 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.8 13.3589403974 58% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 80.62 53.8541721854 150% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.0 11.0289183223 54% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 8.29 12.2367328918 68% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.54 8.42419426049 78% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 63.6247240618 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 6.0 11.2008830022 54% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 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.