The reading and lecture are both about Chaco structures, which are huge stone buildings found in New Mexico. The author of the reading provides three theories about how these buildings were used. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that the presented arguments are not strong to conclude for what purposes the structures were actually for.
First of all, the author says that the buildings might be used for housing a large number of people, as they look like apartment buildings at Taos. This point is challenged by the lecturer. He points out that despite the outside apartment look, the inside of Chaco buildings was not structured to provide housing for many families, as there were only a few fireplaces.
Secondly, the author contends a theory that the buildings were used to store food because there was plenty of space. The lecturer rebuts this argument. He says that if this point was true, the archeologists would found many containers, where the food would be stored.
Finally, the author states that the Chaco structures could be a ceremonial center, as a lot of broken pots were found. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that a lot of trash stones and other random tools were found, so the broken pots might be just a part of it. He also adds that the pots might be used by the construction workers.
In conclusion, the lecturer effectively casts doubt on all the claims presented in the reading.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 197, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...es about how these buildings were used. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Line 3, column 76, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...the buildings might be used for housing a large number of people, as they look like apartment bui...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, if, look, second, secondly, so, in conclusion, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1211.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 250.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.844 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47297391818 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.536 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 357.3 419.366225166 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.9878170222 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.5 110.228320801 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8571428571 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.21428571429 7.06452816374 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.281115607498 0.272083759551 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0926334268009 0.0996497079465 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655405870876 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140446333605 0.162205337803 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.078801165356 0.0443174109184 178% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 13.3589403974 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 53.8541721854 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.39 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 63.6247240618 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.