TPO 30
The reading passage embraces the idea that burning mirror was an effective way when Roman attacked Greek during 2200 years ago owing to the fact that it was able to set fire on Greek's ships. But there are several pieces of evidence suggest that this is just a myth and there was not such a technology in that time. However, the lecturer finds all the ideas in the passage dubious and presents some evidence to refute them all.
First, the author contends that ancient Greek probably did not have such technology to produce parabolic curvature mirror with different shapes. In contrast, the lecturer brings up the idea that mathematical talent of ancient Greek provided an opportunity for Greek to form polish copper into different geometrical shapes and parabola.
Furthermore, the author holds the view that set a ship on fire would have taken a long time, for example, ten minutes. So, burning mirror was not an effective way because ships moved constantly in the different direction. Conversely, the professor underlines the idea that although wood takes a long time to set on fire, other materials used in Greek's ships like pitch, a sticky substance, which set the ship on fire in a second.
Finally, as set forth by the author Roman used flaming arrows instead of burning mirror because it was a common way to set the ship on fire easily and quickly from the same distance. On the contrary, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that flaming arrows was a common way to set a ship on fire so, soldiers were familiar with this strategy because they were able to see what is happening.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, for example, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1332.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 278.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.79136690647 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42243153157 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.532374100719 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 418.5 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => 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: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 41.3623016768 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.2 110.228320801 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8 21.698381199 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.2 7.06452816374 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.477340732698 0.272083759551 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.185140204992 0.0996497079465 186% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0818295270386 0.0662205650399 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.275734013014 0.162205337803 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.04443430624 0.0443174109184 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 53.8541721854 98% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.0289183223 114% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.8 12.2367328918 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.