tp05 the explanation of the purpose of the Great house
The lecture apparently refutes the point illustrated in the reading material. According to the professor, all the points made in the reading about the explanations of the Great house are not convincing. On the contrary, the reading contends an opposite stands that there are three competing explanations of the usage of the three to four stories high architectural building with massive stone constructions and contains hundreds of rooms.
The first point the professor uses to cast doubt on the reading is that though the external of the building seems to be reasonable to be an apartment, the internal of the construction has lack of fireplaces to support a huge amount of population, which differs from the statement in the reading is that the building shall be purely residential owing to the tremendous amount of rooms it provides to support many people's lives for centuries.
Another evidence the speaker adopts to contradict the passage is that evidence shows that there are no uncovered maize or remain containers found in the building which are unable to prove the construction was for storing. However, the reading material holds that several people consider the purpose of the huge stone building was for storing food supplies of maize since maize was the kind of crop that can tolerate for a long period without spoiling.
In conclusion, the point made in the lecture contrasts with what is presented in the reading. As the professor claims, the pots that were abandoned near the construction might be made by the construction workers, which is a piece of weak evidence the support the explanation of the Great house, whereas the reading material holds that the discoveries of a significant amount of containers for preparing meals or servings proved that the building obtains the purpose of the ceremonial center.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, first, however, if, so, whereas, as for, in conclusion, kind of, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1539.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 299.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14715719064 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82191019447 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505016722408 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 462.6 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => 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: 37.0 21.2450331126 174% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 125.218808491 49.2860985944 254% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 192.375 110.228320801 175% => OK
Words per sentence: 37.375 21.698381199 172% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5 7.06452816374 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.117146297558 0.272083759551 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.060205674152 0.0996497079465 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0872164891453 0.0662205650399 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0739174836959 0.162205337803 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0621613267705 0.0443174109184 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 21.5 13.3589403974 161% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.38 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.5 11.0289183223 150% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.8 10.498013245 160% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.2008830022 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.