The article and the lecture are both about the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico.While the article states three theories about the usage of such buildings, the lecturer casts doubts on all theories. The professor says that those theories are inconvincing.
First of all, the article claims that the Chaco structures were mainly residential. This point is challenged by the lecturer. He says that from outside it might look like american nativ's building, but from inside it casts doubt on several people might have lived there. He adds that if one hundred people lived there, it would have been many fire places for their cooking. They had fire places only for 10 families, however these houses contain rooms for more than one hundred families, so the primary usage could not have been residential.
The second theory states that the Chaco structures were used to store food supplies. The lecture rebuts this point. The professor says that this theory unsupported by evidence. The excavation could not have been found many maize containers. He also says that the split maize on the floor is an evidence that those houses have not been used for storage.
The last theory explains that those houses were used as ceremonial centers, as the deposits from excavation contained large number of pots. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits out that the excavation also revealed unexpected material, which is large construction building material like sand and stones. This construction material was a trash of heab, and the pots could be a regular trash too.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 90, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: While
...ttlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico.While the article states three theories about...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 117, 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.
...upplies. The lecture rebuts this point. The professor says that this theory unsuppo...
^^^
Line 5, column 178, 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.
...at this theory unsupported by evidence. The excavation could not have been found ma...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, look, second, so, while, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1310.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 258.0 270.72406181 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07751937984 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46506752426 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558139534884 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 397.8 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.9299064245 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.3333333333 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 7.06452816374 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.405829670156 0.272083759551 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122638036412 0.0996497079465 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0784182883867 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.222510808732 0.162205337803 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0815832261308 0.0443174109184 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.66 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.