The article and the lecturer are mainly argued about the preservation of the archeological crafts in the twentieth century.
The article states that in the recent decades the archeology failed to safeguard the art crafts and provide three reasons to support. However, the professor explained that at the end of the nineteenth century Britain government release a set of standard guidelines to protect the historical remains and he refutes the each of the author's evidence.
First, The reading states that because of the new constructions, many of the important art crafts were lost at the building sites. The professor refutes this point by saying according to the new guidelines the archeologist must evaluate the site before the construction starts. He also explained that if the site contains any evidence of historical remains that must be preserved and documented before the construction starts.
Second, the article avers that the archeologist has an inadequate financial support from the government to protect the historical evidence. However, the professor contended this point by saying as per the latest rules, the construction company should pay for the archeologist for site evaluation and no further grant required from the agencies to support financially.
Third, the reading climes that it is difficult to have the carrier as an archeologist because of the limited employment. The lecture opposes this point by saying there is a lot of paid work. He illustrated that experts hired the archeologist in every stage of the evaluation from the finding of the evidence to the conduct of the research and the writing the report.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 367, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he research and the writing the report.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1381.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 261.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29118773946 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9297545599 2.5805825403 114% => OK
Unique words: 130.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.498084291188 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 424.8 419.366225166 101% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 42.0786355559 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.545454545 110.228320801 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7272727273 21.698381199 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.90909090909 7.06452816374 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.151830051704 0.272083759551 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0569535384314 0.0996497079465 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0373010735729 0.0662205650399 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0798583440129 0.162205337803 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.033963677684 0.0443174109184 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => 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: 13.7 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.