The settlements of New Mexico's Chaco Canyon in American Southwest were notable for their massive stone buildings, known as great houses, containing hundreds of rooms and standing three or four stories high since the twelfth century A.D. Archeologists have been trying to determine how these buildings were used but still have not come up with a universally agreed-upon explanation. However, there are three competing theories that provide plausible explanations.
One theory states the Chaco structures were residential and held hundreds of people. Supporters of this theory look too similar architectural structures in more recent Southwest societies. One structure, in particular, that is strikingly similar to the Chaco buildings is the apartment building at Taos, New Mexico, which has housed several people of the centuries.
The second theory argues that the Chaco structures were used as food storage facilities. Since one of the main crops of the Chaco people was grain maize, it could be stored for an extended time period without spoiling. The large size of the structures made them ideal for storing large crops of maize.
A third theory proposes the houses were used as ceremonial gathering places. Archeologists discovered a large mound of old material near one house called Pueblo Alto. Further inspection of the mound revealed deposits containing several broken pots. It has been documented in other Native American cultures that during special ceremonies they ate a festive meal and discarded the pots that the meal had been prepared or served with. Because of these documented ceremonies, the finding at Pueblo Alto has been interpreted as evidence that people gathered there for special ceremonies.
Both reading passage and lecture talks about settlements of New Mexixo's Chaco Canyonn in American southwest. The passage gives 3 possible theories of how these buildings could have been used. However, lecture contradicts all three.
The first theory suggests that, the building could have been used for residential purpose. This suggestion is based on supporters observation that similar architectural structures were found in Southwest societies which were residential. However, lecture disputes this because, Even though outer structure of the buildings are similar to residential buildings, there were not enough fire places to cook for number of people the building can host. For instance, there was place for 100 families but only 10 places for cooking fire is found.
Second theory suggests that, these building would have been used for food storage for grain maize. This suggestion is based on the observation that places were large enough to store. However, the lecture based on excavation results, says that there were no maize containers found in the building and no spilled grains and thus argues that the building was not used for food storage.
Third theory suggests that, the building could have been used for ceremonial gatherings. This suggestion is based on an observation that, other native American cultures had a practice of braking the food container after the ceremony. Broken pots were found in this building which lead to the suggestion of similar ceremonies occurring in the building.However, lecture disputes with the evidence that there were other materials like sand stones, construction waste and other thrash was found in the building. It suggests, these kind of material are necessity for a ceremonial event and thus the building could have been just a thrash collecting place.
In conclusion, the passage explains three theories which suggests three probable usage of Chaco Canyonn buildings. However, lecture disputes each of them with evidence against all three.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 120, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'supporters'' or 'supporter's'?
Suggestion: supporters'; supporter's
...al purpose. This suggestion is based on supporters observation that similar architectural ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 352, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...ar ceremonies occurring in the building.However, lecture disputes with the evidence tha...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 522, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this kind' or 'these kinds'?
Suggestion: this kind; these kinds
...was found in the building. It suggests, these kind of material are necessity for a ceremon...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, second, so, third, thus, for instance, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1700.0 1373.03311258 124% => OK
No of words: 311.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46623794212 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66158709493 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.495176848875 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 506.7 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
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: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.1345086308 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.25 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4375 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.125 7.06452816374 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.177837338813 0.272083759551 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.071938101425 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0289849257754 0.0662205650399 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115019959627 0.162205337803 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0241103820187 0.0443174109184 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.