The reading states that psittacosaur dinosaur’s remains were found inside the belly of a 150-million-year-old fossil of a mammal dinosaur known as R. robustus. The passage also hypothesizes that the R. robustus was a scavenger instead of an active hunter because it ate unhatched dinosaur eggs. However, the professor opposes this argument and refutes each of the points made in the reading. She casts doubts on the main points of the passage based on three reasons.
First, the reading claims that given the smaller size of R. robustus in comparison to psittacosaurs it would have been questionable to state that they could have hunted bigger prey than them. The professor disagrees with this argument by explaining that the R. robustus could have hunted the baby dinosaurs as they were identical in size to that of the mammal.
Second, the reading argues that R. robustus is much more suitable for scavenging rather than hunting. Mainly, because the mammal had short legs and the positioning was also not favorable for them to move fast. The professor opposes this idea. She believes that if a modern-day mammal “Tasmanian Devil” also has similar features as that of R. robustus, but can run up to 15 kilometers per hour. Additionally, she mentions that the Tasmanian devils are swift in their movement and are successful hunters.
Finally, the reading states that the dinosaur bones found inside the mammal’s stomach did not have teeth marks of the mammal. It uses this evidence to assist the idea that R. robustus must have preyed on unguarded dinosaur nests with eggs and swallowed them whole. On the contrary, the speaker suggests that R. robustus had powerful jaws that helped them to swallow their kill in whole or large pieces. She also states that this might be the reason why there were no teeth marks on the bones found inside the mammal’s stomach.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 22.412803532 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1562.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00641025641 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67583483136 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.541666666667 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 465.3 419.366225166 111% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 13.0662251656 168% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.3176547149 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 71.0 110.228320801 64% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.1818181818 21.698381199 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.04545454545 7.06452816374 43% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
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: 12.0 4.27373068433 281% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258091265918 0.272083759551 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0692037965117 0.0996497079465 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102400894183 0.0662205650399 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.173034768731 0.162205337803 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0180316573871 0.0443174109184 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.3 13.3589403974 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 65.73 53.8541721854 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.19 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.