The reading passage suggests three theories about how the Chaco Canyon buildings used for such as residential, store food supplies and it can be a ceremonial center. However, the lecturer cast doubts the theories suggested by the author.
First and foremost, the article states that the Chaco Canyon used to be residential for hundreds of people and also the structure of it is similar to the apartments of Modern Mexico. On the other hand, the lecturer rejected this point by saying if this old building used for residential, it should include many fireplaces but the Chaco Canyon has only about ten fireplaces.
Secondly, the reading indicates that the Chaco Canyon used to store food supplies because the main grain of the Mexican needs to requires to restore for a long time. In contrast, the lecturer argued there is not enough remaining of the grains to support the idea in the old building.
Finally, the passage offers that the Chaco Canyon can be used to be ceremonial center with evidence researchers found many remainings of food near the old building. Nevertheless, the professor made a counterclaim to the idea by explaining that the remainings were not related stuff of the ceremony, this includes many construction materials. According to him, the food remaining was the construction workers.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 139, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'restoring'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'require' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: restoring
... grain of the Mexican needs to requires to restore for a long time. In contrast, the lect...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 12.0772626932 33% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1102.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 215.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12558139535 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82921379641 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76014280754 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 116.0 145.348785872 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.539534883721 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 335.7 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.7312965259 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.444444444 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8888888889 21.698381199 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.7777777778 7.06452816374 181% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => 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 : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279869602238 0.272083759551 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114179737335 0.0996497079465 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0782165122225 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175136962407 0.162205337803 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0442724234493 0.0443174109184 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.