TOEFL INT writing TP33 the theories of the carved stone balls
The lecture apparently refutes the point illustrated in the reading material. According to the professor, the arguments provided in the reading about the usage of the carved stone balls are not convincing. On the contrary, the reading contends an opposite stand that there are theories about the purpose and meaning of the carved stone balls.
The first point the professor uses to cast doubt on the reading is that there are no findings of wears of the stone balls, and most of them contain little or no damage showing that the stone balls are not made for weapons, which differs from the statement in the reading that the holes found in the balls show that they might be crafted in order to serve as weapons for hunting or fighting.
Another evidence the speaker adopts to contradict the passage is though the size of the balls is uniformed, the mass of them varies due to the component of the balls that form various types of stones which obtain diverse densities. However, the reading states that the uniform size of the balls indicated that the stone balls might serve as measurements of weight for trading.
In conclusion, the point made in the lecture contrasts with what is presented in the reading. As the professor claims, although several balls possess elaborate designs, many others contain too simple markings and there are no carved stone balls unearthed from tombs due to the fact that it is noticeable that high ranking people might bury valuable objects in their graves, which shows that the balls are not the sign of social status, whereas the reading material holds that the design of the balls contains elaborate carvings implies that the carved stone balls might mark as vital social status.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...and meaning of the carved stone balls. The first point the professor uses to ca...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ve as weapons for hunting or fighting. Another evidence the speaker adopts to c...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...as measurements of weight for trading. In conclusion, the point made in the lec...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, first, however, if, so, whereas, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => 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: 1432.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90410958904 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.30986486596 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.493150684932 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 422.1 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 36.0 21.2450331126 169% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 144.618247466 49.2860985944 293% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 179.0 110.228320801 162% => OK
Words per sentence: 36.5 21.698381199 168% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.375 7.06452816374 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.27033648344 0.272083759551 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120992319287 0.0996497079465 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0783389503205 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172661361156 0.162205337803 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0408089284901 0.0443174109184 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.9 13.3589403974 149% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.86 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.0289183223 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.48 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.4 10.498013245 156% => 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.