The reading and the lecture are both about the archeology. The author of the reading states that there are serious problems and limitations in the archaeology of 20th century and provides three reasons for support. However, the lecturer explains that the new rules proposed by the United States in 1990 has changed the whole field and refute's each of the author points.
First, the article conveys that many important and valuable artifacts were lost due to the construction of the building. Furthermore, while digging, the artifacts were found but not preserved. On the other hand, the lecturer refutes this point by saying that the builders examine the site before digging and they will have a plan and documentation before constructing a building. So there is no possibility for loss of artifacts.
Second, the text explains that financial support for archaeology was not sufficient. Moreover changing priorities of government brought reductions in funding. Nevertheless, the lecture opposes this point by saying that money will be given by construction companies before initial examinations and after the completion of work.
Third, the article posits that the career in archaeology would be more difficult because of the fewer jobs. However, the professor says that there is a paid work in many areas such as writing reports, examining and in research. Moreover, he says that the number of archaeology's got highest jobs in Britain, which was ever happened in the past.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 86, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...ort for archaeology was not sufficient. Moreover changing priorities of government broug...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 279, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'got the highest'.
Suggestion: got the highest
...he says that the number of archaeologys got highest jobs in Britain, which was ever happene...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, so, third, while, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1247.0 1373.03311258 91% => OK
No of words: 236.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28389830508 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91947592106 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80146919943 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.597457627119 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 370.8 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.1824720322 49.2860985944 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.9230769231 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1538461538 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.76923076923 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
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: 0.286857818836 0.272083759551 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0955413656096 0.0996497079465 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0526691152042 0.0662205650399 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157167128919 0.162205337803 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0410701417682 0.0443174109184 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.