The reading and lecture are both about the burning mirror weapon of the Greek people. The author of reading feels that this story of burning mirror is not real. However, the lecturer casts doubt on these explanations. She is of opinion that these explanations are faulty.
To begin with, the writer argues that the technological development in Greeks era is not sufficient to make such weapon. To be more specific, the mirror should have a precise shape that appropriate to focus the sunlight strong enough to fire the ships. The professor casts doubt on this explanation. She said that the ancient Greeks have enough technology to manufacture the large sheet of cooper and put it in the boat.
Secondly, the author mentions that it is take too much time to fire the ships. This is because it took ten minutes to set the boat on fire, so the ship can move in that time. The lecturer, in contrast, feels that it just need ten minutes to fire the boat with the wood material. In addition, she points out hat the pitch can catch fire so quickly and spread the fire all around the boat that is made by wood. As a result, the burring mirror is efficient weapon of ancient Greeks.
Finally, the writer points out that the Greeks people did not have the flaming arrows, which is the common way to fire the ships in long distance. The professor feels the opposite. She argues that we can not see the burning in the boat. However, the Greeks can use other way the burn the Roman ships.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, in addition, in contrast, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1219.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 267.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.56554307116 5.08290768461 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04229324003 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.30504795673 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.501872659176 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 362.7 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => 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: 32.9951238927 49.2860985944 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 71.7058823529 110.228320801 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.7058823529 21.698381199 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.64705882353 7.06452816374 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 4.45695364238 247% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.141918661743 0.272083759551 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0494079777651 0.0996497079465 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0546680257223 0.0662205650399 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0939608949172 0.162205337803 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0334402055061 0.0443174109184 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.9 13.3589403974 59% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 73.17 53.8541721854 136% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 11.0289183223 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.93 12.2367328918 73% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.92 8.42419426049 82% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 63.6247240618 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.2008830022 62% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.