The main idea of both the text and the listening is about Private collectors of fossils and trading them. The author of the passage, by providing three reasons, claims that selling and buying fossils by private collectors would have bad impacts, however, the lecturer refuses these reasons and states that these negative impact of private collecting and selling and buying is exaggerated and it’s benefits outweighs negative sides for the following reasons.
First of all, the writer of the article brings about that instead of donating these fossils to museums they are being sold to private collectors and the public interests would decrease because of this. The professor, on the other hand, refuses this idea. She adds that, private collectors will display these fossils in different places and they will show them in public schools. Hence, the public awareness and interest in fossils will not decline.
Second of all, the writer of the essay avers that scientists will not be able to access these fossils and acquire them and cannot study and research about them. The lecturer in the lecture, opposes this notion too and explains that this is not realistic. She continues that, private collectors, inorder to show that these fossils are valuable they need that scientists approve and identify these fossils. Moreover, scientists can take detail examinations and researches on these fossils.
Thirdly, the author of the text points out that these commercial fossil collectors will destroy fossils and evidences because they are uneducated and untrained and are not careful. The speaker, conversely, rebuts this also and states that the more fossils we have the better. So, in this way scientists have more fossils to work and do study on that and it is not beneficial to perform careful carrying and unearthing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 96, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ommercial fossil collectors will destroy fossils and evidences because they are u...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, first, hence, however, if, moreover, second, so, third, thirdly, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 7.30242825607 315% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 22.412803532 178% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1530.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20408163265 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45836259945 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.489795918367 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 458.1 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.050909743 49.2860985944 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.692307692 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6153846154 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.15384615385 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185525258255 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0733969871365 0.0996497079465 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0433229067012 0.0662205650399 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127617228594 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0485354318892 0.0443174109184 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 10.7273730684 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.