TPO 25
The lecturer mainly contradicts the information given in the text that provides three reasons to prove that clay jars discovered in Iraq was not electric battery. In contrast, the professor claims the reasons of the author is not convincing and refutes each one.
Firstly, the passage states that because of no electricity conductors has found nearby the excavation place, there is less likely to be a electric battery. On the other hand, the professor states the local people, not trained and professional archaeologist, excavated the place and it is probable that they overlooked the other parts of things and it might have thrown away the electrical conductors.
Secondly, the text refers to nearby discoveries as another possible scenario for jar clays which was used as holding scrolls. The professor refutes this idea by stating that even though another discovery is found nearby, it does not prove anything. It can be interpreted in another way; for example, people designed the jar clays for holding scrolls, but later on, they found another usage for it as a battery. In other words, people invented for one purpose, and after sometimes they used it as a battery, in the second purpose.
Lastly, the reading claims that the fact that they were not any electrical devices fortify that the old discovery was not battery. However, the professor states there are possibilities for battery usage in that period. Some people might have used it as magical power to amaze other people. Moreover, it could have used for healing people, too; the same approach we use today
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 137, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ation place, there is less likely to be a electric battery. On the other hand, th...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, for example, in contrast, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 18.0 30.3222958057 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1314.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 260.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05384615385 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5867665041 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 417.6 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.5651832214 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.5 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6666666667 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5833333333 7.06452816374 164% => 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: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.254614930221 0.272083759551 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0941138687634 0.0996497079465 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0460360200594 0.0662205650399 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149222146617 0.162205337803 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0588166263524 0.0443174109184 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.01 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.