Starting in the 1960s and continuing until the 1980s, sailors in Russian submarines patrolling the North Alantic and Arctic Ocean would occasionally hear strange sounds. These underwater noises reminded the submarine crews of frog croaks, so they called the sounds “quackers” (from the Russian word for frog sounds). The sources of the sound seemed to be moving with great speed and agility; however, the submarines’ sonar (a method of detecting objects underwater) was unable to detect any solid moving objects in the area. There are several theories about what might have caused the odd sounds.
The first theory suggests that the strange noises were actually the calls of male and female ocra whales during a courtship ritual. Orca whales are known to inhabit the areas where the submarines were picking up the bizarre noises. Orcas have been studied extensively, and the sounds they make when trying to attract a male are similar to those that the submarines were detecting.
A second idea is that the sounds were caused by giant squid. Giant squids are giant marine invertebrates that live deep in the ocean and prey on large fish. They are difficult to detect by sonar because they have soft bodies with no skeleton. Not much is known about giant squid behavior, but their complex brains suggest they are intelligent animals. It is possible they have the ability to emit sound, and perhaps they approached the submarines out of curiosity.
A third theory suggests the Russian submarines were picking up stray sounds from some military technology, like another country’s submarines that were secretly patrolling the area. Perhaps the foreign submarines did not register on sonar because they were using a kind of technology specifically designed to make them undetectable by sonar. The strange frog like sounds may have been emitted by the foreign submarines unintentionally.
In the reading passage, the author concentrates on several theories about the possible cause of strange sounds heard by the sailors near the North Atlantic and Arctic Ocean. However, the lecturer casts doubt on all these theories and respectively points out problems with all author's assertions.
Firstly, the author argues that these odd noises may be the result of the calls caused by male and female ocra whales during a courtship ritual. By contrast, the lecturer challenges this idea and states that this opinion has remained plausible new. However, it is unlikely to be true since although the ocra whales’ population tends to live deep into the ocean, they produce sound when they are near the surface of the water. Thus, the sailors should be able to detect them easily as they give off such odd noises.
Secondly, the author suggests that giant squids, which are difficult to detect, may be responsible for these sounds. Nevertheless, the lecturer brings up the fact that submarines first detected these sounds in the 1960s. However, they have stopped being emitted for about two decades. If the mentioned squids cause such noises, there is no reason why they have been stopped since the 1980s because giant squids still live there today.
Lastly, the author asserts that some military technology, such as another country's submarines, may have produced the sounds. Conversely, the lecturer refutes this claim too and clarifies that the produced sounds seem to move quickly and change in different directions. In addition, there is no engine noise accompanying the sounds. At the moment, we don't have the technology to manufacture such fast submarines with such silent engines.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 350, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ompanying the sounds. At the moment, we dont have the technology to manufacture such...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, still, thus, in addition, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
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: 1419.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 274.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17883211679 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47680109464 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 145.348785872 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.609489051095 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 422.1 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => 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: 34.4520518627 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.357142857 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5714285714 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.78571428571 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.158162047372 0.272083759551 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0527244134548 0.0996497079465 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0468437608123 0.0662205650399 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0923341562831 0.162205337803 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0252446857234 0.0443174109184 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.