Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they oppose
specific points made in the reading passage.
The article introduces the topic of altruism, which is defined as the situation when an animal sacrifices itself for the community and it expects to receive nothing in exchange for that. More specifically, the writer discusses the many ways that altruism is being met in the mammal world, including in the human society. The lecturer in the listening passage disagrees. She believes that altruism does not exist in the society because the altruist acts in his/her own interests and gains something from that.
In the reading, the author begins by stating that human beings are often altruistic, while giving food to strangers that need it or by donating their own organs. The lecturer, however, disagrees with this viewpoint. She states that humans are not so altruistic, because by doing the deed, the expect to receive appreciation and approval. She goes on to say that altruistic people seek to increase their self-worth.
The author also claims that some mammals, such as meerkats that live in the grasslands of Africa have an altruistic impulse. They act as a sentinel while their group hunts for food and even eats what they have found. Therefore, they don’t even eat anything. Again, the lecturer believes there are flaws in the writer’s argument. The speaker holds that those sentinels are not so altruistic, because new studies show that they usually eat before going on guard.
Another reason why the author feels that meerkats are altruistic, is that when a predator is approaching the group he is guarding, instead of an instant run, he gives an alarm cry, helping thus others to escape and placing itself in danger. The professor in the listening passage is doubtful that this is accurate. She goes on to say that the sentinel is in a lesser danger than its group, because it notices the predator first, and thus it has more time to escape. She suggests that their predators usually follow the bigger groups of meerkats, and therefore the sentinel meerkat is not an altruist, but a pragmatist.
In conclusion, both the writer and the lecturer hold conflicting views about the nature of altruism in the animal world. It’s clear to see why they’ll have trouble finding a common ground on this issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 290, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... altruistic, because by doing the deed, the expect to receive appreciation and approval. S...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, so, therefore, thus, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 22.412803532 210% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1858.0 1373.03311258 135% => OK
No of words: 372.0 270.72406181 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99462365591 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39173103935 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55594558722 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 145.348785872 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545698924731 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 549.9 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.6793039504 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.7894736842 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5789473684 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.26315789474 7.06452816374 60% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0666985626533 0.272083759551 25% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0267828231889 0.0996497079465 27% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0337634966963 0.0662205650399 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0386340595314 0.162205337803 24% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0218155036767 0.0443174109184 49% => 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: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.