Based on the given materials, the article as well as the lecturer discussess a discovery of some ancient vessels and its persumable function in old times. Some suggested that they were sort of some kind if battery. The author states that these this is not true and challenges the idea. That being said the lecturer provides several arguments to repudiate this claim.
Initially the author says that if these vessels were ancient batteries then archaeologists would have found some evidence like mettal conductors. Since only vesseles themselves had been found, they can not be batteries. However the lecturer states that there might have been wire but as vessels were found by locals, other evidences might have been over looked. she points out there might have been wires but since local people are not archaeologists, they could miss them or even throw them away.
Second, the writer proclaims that the vessels which are found are analogous to those that had been found earlier in Selecia and they were only containers for sacred texts. Yet again, the lecturer underscores that the vesseles might had been used for this porpous but after a while ancient people have found a new usage for them. She states it is possible that ancient people found out that by adding some liquid they can create a source of energy and as aresult the first battery was borne by adapting.
The final point of contention between reading and listening passages is the batteries profit for ancient people. Te authr thinks even if vessels were ancient batteries, the prople who were living in that period had no use for it. On the other hand, the speaker explains that this is not true because there might have been somethings to use this batteries for. She point out that people could use it for magic porpuses as consequence of the shock it creates. Another
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 204, Rule ID: ANALYSIS_IF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'of'?
Suggestion: of
...gested that they were sort of some kind if battery. The author states that these t...
^^
Line 3, column 221, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... been found, they can not be batteries. However the lecturer states that there might ha...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 350, Rule ID: OVER_LOOKED[1]
Message: Did you mean 'overlooked'?
Suggestion: overlooked
...locals, other evidences might have been over looked. she points out there might have been w...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 363, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
... evidences might have been over looked. she points out there might have been wires ...
^^^
Line 7, column 341, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...there might have been somethings to use this batteries for. She point out that peopl...
^^^^
Line 7, column 365, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'She' must be used with a third-person verb: 'points'.
Suggestion: points
...methings to use this batteries for. She point out that people could use it for magic ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, look, second, so, then, well, while, sort of, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 10.4613686534 220% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 22.412803532 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1533.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89776357827 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33723485383 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520766773163 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 468.0 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.3913298588 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.2 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8666666667 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 7.06452816374 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.407203254689 0.272083759551 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.14528249418 0.0996497079465 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0891355306408 0.0662205650399 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258939528095 0.162205337803 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0869924599618 0.0443174109184 196% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.