The reading passage presents three reasons why vessels had found were not likely to be used as electricity batteries in ancient times, but the lecturer poses some evidences against those reasons mentioned in the reading.
To begin with, the reading suggests the first reason that the vessels had not been attached to some electricity conductors like metal wires, but the lecturer holds that those vessels were discovered by the local people. Therefore, those conductors like metal wires may be overlooked or thrown away by the local people.
In addition, the reading purposes the second reason that the copper cylinders may have a similar function as the copper cylinders from Seleucia, which was not used for generating electricity, because both of them look as the same. However, the lecturer argues that similar look cannot prove anything. The original design may be as same as the copper cylinders from Seleucia, but the vessels adapted to another function of producing electricity with adding iron and liquid inside.
Finally, it is said in the reading that the function of battery seems to be useless because of no device relying on electricity. On the contrary, it is pointed out in lecture that they can use those batteries as a supernatural power for convincing other with a magical ability or for healing like stimulating the muscle and easing the pain.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 237, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ed by the local people. Therefore, those conductors like metal wires may be overl...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, look, may, second, so, therefore, in addition, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1149.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 224.0 270.72406181 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12946428571 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86867284054 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59266635834 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.553571428571 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 369.9 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.3604103824 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.625 110.228320801 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0 21.698381199 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.375 7.06452816374 189% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.388362189641 0.272083759551 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.153515816062 0.0996497079465 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0951322719225 0.0662205650399 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.216764702332 0.162205337803 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.03972545841 0.0443174109184 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.3589403974 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 53.8541721854 64% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.0289183223 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.