Tpo 25
electicity cylinder
both the author and the lecturer discuss whether vessels were actually used as electric batteries in ancient times or not. The passage claims that it is not likely that the vessels have electric battery utilizing. The professor, on the other hand, rejects whatever mentioned in the reading through citing three reasons.
First, both author and the professor talk about the presence of metal wire. According to the passage, there was no metal wire located near the vessels. The lecturer, nevertheless, rejects author's view and illustrates the idea that probably local people who excavate vessels did not pay attention to the metal wire locating near the jars.
Second of all, both the reading and the lecture discuss using copper cylinder for holding scrolls of sacred texts. The author argues that since the cylinders found with jars is similar to the ruins of Seleucia, it is very likely they were utilized for maintaining scrolls. However, the professor refutes this, saying that producing electricity was other purpose of using copper cylinders in addition to holding scrolls.
Eventually, the passage and the lecture address the subject of electricity application. The passage goes on to mention that vessels would have been completely useless to ancient people because they had no device that replied on electricity. In contrast, the professor points out that electricity could be used in activities such as stimulating muscles when people touched the vessels.
All in all, the authors maintains that vessels were not used as electric batteries in ancient times, while the professor not only completely cast doubt on it but he also demonstrates that vessels could have electric use.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Both
both the author and the lecturer discuss whe...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, nevertheless, second, so, while, in addition, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1439.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 269.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34944237918 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.564980334 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542750929368 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 435.6 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.2257948591 49.2860985944 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.692307692 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6923076923 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.38461538462 7.06452816374 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.489429787677 0.272083759551 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.161000238949 0.0996497079465 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0982557258141 0.0662205650399 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258709335068 0.162205337803 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0781767988356 0.0443174109184 176% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => 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.