Now summarize condense the points made in the lecture, compose your response and clarify how they provide a
reason to feel ambiguous about the points made in the perusing passage.
The reading and lecture are both about the aultrism behaviour which means having unselfishness nature towards others without having advantage to themself. The author of the reading states that both human and animal can have this attribute and expect nothing in return. The lecturer disagrees. He opposes the idea of author and attacks each of the claim made in the reading.
Firstly, the author begins by illustrating example of meercat which tend to guard the predator while other members are having food. The lecturer believes there are flaws in the writer’s position. He contends that there has been instances of meercat found to be eaten first before providing safety to others. Hence, this seems fake to predict that meercat are not selfish in nature.
Secondly, according to the writing, as soon as they see hunter they first alert the other member to protect them putting their life at risk. The speaker on other hand points out that when they confront predator they escape first to prevent themself from killing instead of informing others about the hunter. Therefore, it is just a myth that meercat protect other without concerning their life.
Finally, the reading passage also notes that human as well they prompt to donate their kidney even to the stranger without obtaining anything in return. The professor rebuts this argument. He puts forth the idea that although they do not attain monetory benefit however the non-materialistic thing such as appreciation and gratefulness that they receive from public should not be overlooked. Thus, nobody does nothing in free of cost and they all are selfish in nature.
As we can see, the author and the professor holds very conflicting views on aultrism. The speaker effectively challenges the writer’s argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 270, 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.
...attribute and expect nothing in return. The lecturer disagrees. He opposes the idea...
^^^
Line 4, column 410, Rule ID: NOT_NOTHING[1]
Message: Double negation. You probably should say 'anything'.
Suggestion: anything
...ld not be overlooked. Thus, nobody does nothing in free of cost and they all are selfis...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, hence, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1491.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17708333333 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51879269639 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583333333333 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 443.7 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.4099401196 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.7058823529 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.9411764706 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.11764705882 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114921933304 0.272083759551 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0334227799166 0.0996497079465 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0338300597955 0.0662205650399 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0518427018442 0.162205337803 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0320608419614 0.0443174109184 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.05 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.