The lecturer disputes some arguments presented in the reading about the archeological evidence of the clay jars not being used as electric batteries. She finds these views very unconvincing.
First, the reading claims that there is no strong evidence to support that the vessels were used as electric batteries due to absence of electrical conductors such metal wires. Conversely, the lecturer refutes by stating that the original founders of these vessels were the local residents and are not professional archeologists. She points out that it is highly probable that they might have neglected and discarded the vessels since they do not have an in-depth knowledge about the vessels, and may have misinterpreted the findings of the clay jars.
Second, the reading posits that the copper cylinders discovered in the vessels were mainly used holding religious sacred texts rather than generating power supply. This argument seems to hold water due to the similar shape of the copper cylinder and its use for sacred texts. However, the lecturer avers that it is true that while it is copper cylinders were used to hold sacred texts, the iron found within the copper cylinders altogether produces electricity. It would have been the most possible means how the primitive batteries may have been generated.
Finally, the lecturer contends that while the reading states that there are no usefulness of the batteries since the ancient people had no devices which requires electricity, the electric batteries were definitely used for many other purposes. She exemplifies the various uses such as its use in healing. She expounded that if modern medicine can use batteries in treatment of pains, this invariably means that the older generations may have also utilized the batteries. Furthermore, the batteries created mild shock or tingly sensation which has been linked to some invisible mysterious powers that convinced people. This is in direct correct to the reading.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 97, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ates that there are no usefulness of the batteries since the ancient people had n...
^^
Line 7, column 578, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... which has been linked to some invisible mysterious powers that convinced people....
^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s is in direct correct to the reading.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, while, such as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1665.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33653846154 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69235157168 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548076923077 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 517.5 419.366225166 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.4650767816 49.2860985944 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.928571429 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2857142857 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35714285714 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.47370931161 0.272083759551 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143275678456 0.0996497079465 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0881086106941 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.266014625069 0.162205337803 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0954603787115 0.0443174109184 215% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.