purposes of ancient jars
The reading passage explores stone jars, artifacts found in the archaeological site in The Plain of Jars, and several theories are given in support of their purpose. As reasonable as these points seem, the professor in the lecture casts doubt on them, indicating that their purposes remain mysterious.
To begin with, the author suggests that ancient kings used jars to ferment food and drink to celebrate victory. Conversely, disputing the reading's point, the lecturer mentions that the manufacture of stone jars was time-consuming and expensive. In contrast, clay jars will be easier to make and can serve the same purpose. Therefore, the lecturer claims that ancient people weren't likely to use stone jars for food fermentation.
Second, even though the author states that ancient people utilize these jars to store water and thus could provide traders who would walk through this area with water resources, the lecturer argues that it's a misconception. This is because the trade route was close to the stream. Travelers could readily access water and didn't need to rely on the additional water source in jars. Accordingly, the lecturer dismisses the theory mentioned in the article.
Last but not least, the lecturer acutely identifies a weakness in a passage that the jars were tombs, in which ancient people probably buried their dead along with valuable artifacts. She points out that tombs normally will be covered with protection to prevent damage. Nevertheless, there weren't any covers found in the plain or above the jars. As a result, without further evidence, the lecturer isn't confident in the theory that the Plain of Jars was an ancient burial site.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 374, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...the lecturer claims that ancient people werent likely to use stone jars for food ferme...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 204, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...ter resources, the lecturer argues that its a misconception. This is because the tr...
^^^
Line 3, column 322, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ravelers could readily access water and didnt need to rely on the additional water so...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 291, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
... to prevent damage. Nevertheless, there werent any covers found in the plain or above ...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 399, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
... without further evidence, the lecturer isnt confident in the theory that the Plain ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, conversely, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, thus, in contrast, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1401.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 270.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18888888889 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59211900436 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.592592592593 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 422.1 419.366225166 101% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.7246082096 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.071428571 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2857142857 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.28571428571 7.06452816374 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.278392451097 0.272083759551 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0834587619169 0.0996497079465 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0808671677097 0.0662205650399 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147285502687 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0851039214432 0.0443174109184 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.