sea cow extinction theory
The reading passage explores why sea cows, a marine mammal dwelling on the waters around Bering island, became extinct in 1768, and several theories are given in support of this argument. As convincing and substantiated as these points seem, the lecturer casts doubt on them, implying that she has no confidence in them.
To begin with, the author attributes the sea cow to the native Siberian people‘s overhunting. The author suggests that native people have kept exploiting sea cows for a long time since they are a good source of food in harsh conditions. Conversely, disputing the author’s statement, the lecturer claims that native people don’t need to capture a large number of sea cows because of sea cows’ massive size. People in Siberian towns only need a few sea cows to maintain their lives for a while. Therefore, there is no reason to refer to native Siberian people as the main factor leading to mass extinction.
Second, even though the author states that it was the ecological change that caused kelp, a sea plant that sea cows rely on, to decline in population, the lecturer argues that it is a misconception. This is because ecosystem disturbance might also pose negative impacts on other marine animals such as whales. Nevertheless, there weren’t any indications showing such consequences. Accordingly, the lecturer believes that sea cows didn’t encounter food shortages.
Last but not least, the lecturer identifies a weakness in the article that European fur traders arrived on the island and caught the last sea cow. She points out that the population of sea cows started to decline long before the European traders’ arrival. Furthermore, in an attempt to provide a more solid and concrete explanation, she details that, in fact, the population of sea cows peaked before the 1700s. As a result, the lecturer indicates that European fur traders have nothing to do with sea cows.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 346, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...hat native people don’t need to capture a large number of sea cows because of sea cows’ massive s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, conversely, furthermore, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, well, while, in fact, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1605.0 1373.03311258 117% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09523809524 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73577127049 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.574603174603 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 489.6 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => 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: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.0907687855 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.0 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.8 7.06452816374 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.409723559586 0.272083759551 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127087170014 0.0996497079465 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0859957895658 0.0662205650399 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204804678677 0.162205337803 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0331598178371 0.0443174109184 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.