Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific theories discussed in the reading passage.
The reading and the lecture are both about the settlement of Chaco Canyon in Mexico. The author of the reading suggests three outlines for the purpose of this building usage. However, the lecturer finds these outlines unconvincing and debunks all suggestions made by the author.
First, the writer claims that the structures were used completely for residential. Support for this claim, the similarity between these structures and apartment buildings in Taos. By contrast, the lecturer refutes the claim. He notes that f there was a residential area, there would be fireplaces. Moreover, he mentions that based on evidence there are only ten fireplaces and the rooms are fewer to support one hundred families.
Second, the author argues that the structures were used as storage for food supply. The structures were a great place to store grain maze, preventing it from spoilage for a long time. This argument is dismissed by the lecturer. Based on finding evidence, he notes that the empty places were used for storage, however, there were no discovered maze containers. He also says that there were not great places to store because of the spoiled maze on the floor discovered.
Finally, it is proposed in the reading that archaeologists identified a pile of broken pots near the structures, meaning that the structure was used as ceremonial places. The lecturer, on the other hand, challenges the propositions provided by the author. He posits that there were other materials found such as building materials and construction tools. This evidence shows, the lecturer believes, the site has been used to throw away trash. In better words, It was a trash site and broken pots, also, support this idea.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1429.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 278.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14028776978 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66980394658 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55035971223 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 443.7 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.0423806969 49.2860985944 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 79.3888888889 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.4444444444 21.698381199 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.61111111111 7.06452816374 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0589678794355 0.272083759551 22% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0228250742162 0.0996497079465 23% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0320357910126 0.0662205650399 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0445081316917 0.162205337803 27% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0417290397496 0.0443174109184 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.