TOEFL T P O 30 - Integrated Writing Task
Both reading and lecture discuss Greek's ingenious weapon called burning mirror that was used in the battle of Roman ships and Greeks soldiers. The author claims that the story of the burning mirror is just a myth, and it is not a real story and provides three reasons of support. The professor states that reasons cannot convince the people and refutes each reason.
First, the reading states that the ancient Greeks did not have advanced technology to make this device. The lecturer denies this reason by saying that this weapon is made from a single sheet of copper, and it could make from very small mirrors. However, to make a large mirror does not need any advanced technology.
Second, the passage explains that the burning mirror would have taken a long time to set the fire ships. The speaker contends this idea and claims that the experiment shows that only ten minutes are needed to woods are being on fire. Also, ships did not contain just woods. They also made from other things like sticky pitches, which are being on fire quickly and they need only a second; therefore, after firing pitch, it spreads the whole of boats and ships quickly.
Third, the author claims that a burning mirror is not an improvement weapon because ancient Greek has advanced weapons like floaming arrows. The professor opposes this point and explains that Roaman soldiers are familiar with this weapon, and when Greeks used this weapon, Roman soldiers could easily watch it, and they were ready for. But by using a mirror, they could not see because they were set on an unobserved place. Roman ships would be surprised; thus, a burning mirror is more effective than the other weapon.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 209, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'wood'.
Suggestion: wood
...ows that only ten minutes are needed to woods are being on fire. Also, ships did not ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, second, so, therefore, third, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => 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: 1389.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82291666667 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.07976256491 2.5805825403 81% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534722222222 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 408.6 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.3111048288 49.2860985944 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.2142857143 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5714285714 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.35714285714 7.06452816374 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.2367328918 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => 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.