The reading and lecture are both about the powered flight ability of pterosaurs. The author of the passage feels that the winged reptiles could not fly by flapping their wings. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the writer. He is of the opinion that these explanations are faulty.
First of all, the author argues that ancient reptiles were cold-blooded animals, which means they could not generate sufficient energy to fly. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that the recent discovery of pterosaurs' fossil reveals that they have dense fur or hair, so these reptiles could probably maintain high body temperature. Accordingly, he said that they would have supplied enough energy to fly.
Secondly, the writer suggests that the ancient reptiles are too massive and huge to able to fly. The lecturer, however, refutes this by mentioning that their bones are hollow instead of solid. He elaborates on this by bringing up the point that these structures enable them to be very light despite their big size. Consequently, their weight is low enough to fly.
Finally, the author posits that pterosaurs' back leg muscles were significantly small and weak to allow them to run and jump, which are the first step to launch to the air. In contrast, the lecturer's position is that pterosaurs used all four back legs to launch into the sky, unlike birds that can take off by jumping two legs. Hence, they did not need high powerful muscles in their back legs to fly.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 178, 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.
... could not fly by flapping their wings. The lecturer challenges the claims made by ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, consequently, finally, first, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, in contrast, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1248.0 1373.03311258 91% => OK
No of words: 252.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95238095238 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98428260373 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4654069223 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575396825397 0.540411800872 106% => OK
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: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.8463788685 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.2 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 7.06452816374 104% => 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 : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
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: 0.114035570791 0.272083759551 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0317395437257 0.0996497079465 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0372877129596 0.0662205650399 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0625637766662 0.162205337803 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0350003538283 0.0443174109184 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 13.3589403974 77% => 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: 11.13 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => 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: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.