The passage and lecture are arguing what was the source of strange noises. The passage author lists out three theories for the source of the noise. In contrast, the lecturer casts doubt these theories and she mentions each theory has sevaral problme, so it is unconvincing.
First, based on the passage, the male orca whales call females orca during a courtship ritual and sailors heard these noises as strage noises. On the contrary, the lecturer refuese this theory and she mentions that coras live in the surface of water while the submarinsm are in depth of water. Moreover, the sonar system of submarine were capable the ocra whales that were in it's nearby. Therefore, the oraca whales were not the souce on these strage noises.
Second, the passage author states the giant squider as another possible theory for explaing the strage noises. The lecturer, however, chalenges this theory and she mentions that these strang noises were detected since 1960 and the sailors reported this strane noise lasting for two decades. The author explains that these gian squiders are living yet and there is no reason that these animal stop manking these nioses. Hence, the giant squiders could not be the source of these noises.
Third, the author guesses a foreign military submarine could make this noise and the russian submarines did not have proper technology for detecting the foreing submarines. Nevertheless, the lecture rebuts this theory and she asserts that, the source of these strange noises move quickly and silent while even today submarines are not capable for miving as much as fast and quiet. In better works, it is unlikely that a country was capable to build such fast and silent submarine in those years.
All in all, the passage provides three reasons for explaining the sources of the strange noises. In contrast, the lecturer refuses these reasons as suitable reasons.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 100, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...strange noises. The passage author lists out three theories for the source of the...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, while, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1585.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08012820513 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.25799177894 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509615384615 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 483.3 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.23620309051 194% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5115793049 49.2860985944 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.0625 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3125 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
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: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => 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: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.