TPO 25
In this set of materials, the reading passage state that a set of clay jars had been excavated in Iraq, and archaeologist believe that ancient people used these clays for producing electricity, but the reading says it not used as batteries. On the other hand, the listening section brings into question the reading points by providing different reasons (and examples).
First and foremost, the reading indicates that these vessels could not use as batteries, because they did not have electricity conductors such as metal wires; in contrast, the lecturer opposes this view by mentioning that clay jars had been discovered by local people, not archaeologists. So, other materials would not attract native people, and they did not have information about the importance of containers; hence, they would ignore them. Indeed, it is not the true reason.
Furthermore, the reading argues that two set of clay jars as the same as the copper cylinders ruins of Seleucia, and copper cylinders used for holding scrolls of sacred texts, so clay jars used the same function as copper cylinders; conversely, what the professor believes is different. She points out that it is true the clay jars are similar to copper cylinders, but it does not prove any things. Ancient people would use vessels for holding scrolls, but later they discovered that by using some liquid and iron in the cylinder that could produce electricity. Also, ancient people did not make vessels for one purpose they used vessels for several purposes.
Finally, according to the reading, ancient people did not need electricity, so the vessels would have been useless for them. However, the lecturer believes that by touching batteries, it makes some shock to the human body, and people would not able to see this power. So, ancient people thought that it was a magic power. Furthermore, they used electricity for healing and reducing pains in muscles.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, so, in contrast, such as, it is true, 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: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1625.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19169329073 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62128844652 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.495207667732 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 483.3 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.51434878587 462% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.1631581369 49.2860985944 159% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.0 110.228320801 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0769230769 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.76923076923 7.06452816374 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => 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: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.413655368424 0.272083759551 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143957342261 0.0996497079465 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100433511487 0.0662205650399 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.245339321476 0.162205337803 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0824034301856 0.0443174109184 186% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.12 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 10.7273730684 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.