The lecturer disputes the author's claims about the effectiveness of the Greek weapons technology. He provides several reason to cast doubt about the point made in the reading and confirms that the burning mirror was a highly efficacious weapon.
First,The speaker does not agree with the author's claims that ancient Greeks did not have any technological advancements in weapon production. He contends by stating that the ancient Greeks did not only develop the burning arrow, but also they were able to develop larger mirror weapons made of several copper sheets that makes the weapon more destructive
.
Second, the author claims that the burning mirror weapon is not effective because it takes more than 10 minutes to burn the Roman's ships. Moreover, the ship has to be in standing position, the lecturer on the hand, states that because the ship is not made only of woods, but of pitches of glue, which is more flammable, the ships can catch fire in a short period of time and even if it was in a moving position.
Finally,The author claims that the Greeks need not to produce the burning mirror because they already have the burning arrow which is a highly advanced weapon. The lecturer refutes the author claims by stating that although this weapon is an effective one, developing the burning mirror instead is more efficacious because the the Romans can see the burning arrows. However, the burning mirror can take them by surprise. Thus, it is more destructive
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 79, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'weapons'' or 'weapon's'?
Suggestion: weapons'; weapon's
...ms about the effectiveness of the Greek weapons technology. He provides several reason ...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 111, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun reason seems to be countable; consider using: 'several reasons'.
Suggestion: several reasons
...e Greek weapons technology. He provides several reason to cast doubt about the point made in t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 6, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , The
...as a highly efficacious weapon. First,The speaker does not agree with the authors...
^^^^
Line 3, column 357, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... that makes the weapon more destructive . Second, the author claims that the bur...
^^
Line 5, column 356, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...le, the ships can catch fire in a short period of time and even if it was in a moving position...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 9, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , The
...it was in a moving position. Finally,The author claims that the Greeks need not ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 53, Rule ID: NEEDNT_TO_DO_AND_DONT_NEED_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'produce'?
Suggestion: produce
... author claims that the Greeks need not to produce the burning mirror because they already...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 325, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ror instead is more efficacious because the the Romans can see the burning arrows. Howe...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 325, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ror instead is more efficacious because the the Romans can see the burning arrows. Howe...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, thus, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1229.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 247.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97570850202 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96437052324 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46496984825 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.497975708502 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 371.7 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.3024892874 49.2860985944 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.9 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3 7.06452816374 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 4.19205298013 215% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.15980593414 0.272083759551 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0732597512184 0.0996497079465 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.055695194143 0.0662205650399 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109311102848 0.162205337803 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0494127507231 0.0443174109184 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 63.6247240618 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
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.