Massive Houses in New Mexico
The reading and lecture are both about the usage of insanely massive stone buildings found in the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico. The author of the reading feels that there are three possible theories of why there were such big houses. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the author. He is of the opinion that the evidences for them are either not convincing enough or there is not enough enough evidence to support.
To begin with, the author says that the houses were only used for residential purpose by many families. The article compares its similarity to the apartment-buildings found at Taos in New Mexico. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that although the exterior portion may resemble the style of an apartment building, but the interior of the houses gave a different story altogether. He supports this by stating that only a small amount of fireplaces enough for supporting ten families were found in a building which is supposed to house almost hundred different families.
Secondly, the writer suggests that the houses were used as a storage facility for preserving grains and ensure food supple for a long period. In the article, it is said that maize was the main crop and it needed place to be stored somewhere. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by mentioning that the excavation results do not contain any traces of maize or the containers used to store the maize grains. He elaborates on this by bringing up the point that, if the houses were used as a storage place, remains of either the grains or the containers in which they were placed should have been found on the floors.
Finally, the author mentions that the hpuses may have been a place where people gathered for festivities and enjoyed the ceremonies. Moreover, the article presents an example of Pueblo Alto where a huge number of discarded pots have been found. In contrast, the lecturer's position is that along with wooden cups a lot of other waste materials, which would not be present at ceremonial functions has been found as a result of excavation. He notes that there were a lot of remains of construction material like sand, wood and tools which were possibly wasted in the construction of the building. Thus, the buildings might just be used as a place for storing the trash heap. Also the wooden cups would possibly belong to the construction workers who cooked their meals in them.
So, this is how the lecturer challenges all the points made by the author.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 39, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The reading and lecture are both about the usage of insanely massive stone buil...
^^
Line 1, column 249, 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.
...ries of why there were such big houses. The lecturer challenges the claims made by ...
^^^
Line 1, column 402, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: enough
...r not convincing enough or there is not enough enough evidence to support. To begin with, th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 571, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a hundred'.
Suggestion: a hundred
...lding which is supposed to house almost hundred different families. Secondly, the wri...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 673, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... as a place for storing the trash heap. Also the wooden cups would possibly belong t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, in contrast, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 10.4613686534 249% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 30.3222958057 162% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2079.0 1373.03311258 151% => OK
No of words: 429.0 270.72406181 158% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84615384615 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55107846309 4.04702891845 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60795724337 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 145.348785872 153% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517482517483 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 642.6 419.366225166 153% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.3685081597 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.95 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.45 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.75 7.06452816374 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13511911983 0.272083759551 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0377857911723 0.0996497079465 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0681691610415 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0693307114298 0.162205337803 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0676728409691 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => 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: 10.85 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 63.6247240618 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.