TPO 30
<p>In this set of materials, the reading passage states that the Roman navy attacked the Greek port city of Syracuse, and Greek defence with a new weapon that named a burning mirror, But the reading passage believes that the Greek could not use a mirror as weapons. On the other hand, the listening section brings into question the reading points by providing different reasons (and examples).
First and foremost, the reading indicates that the ancient Greek did not have advanced technology for making a very precise parabolic mirror; in contrast, the lecturer opposes this view by mentioning that the ancient Greek did not make mirror only with a single sheet. They used several small pieces for making a mirror, so they would easily make parabolic curvature mirror.
Furthermore, the reading argues that making a fire with mirrors need a long time to set the Sun's rays on ships, also ships must be unmoved; therefore, they could not use mirrors. Conversely, what the professor state is different. She points out that making a fire on wood takes a long time of about 10 minutes. But, the ancient Greek did not utilize wood for taking fire. They used a pitch that placed on the body of the ship. The sticky pitch quickly fire, so all pieces of wood near the pitch start to fire.
Finally, according to the reading, the ancient Greek had a modern and better device such as flaming arrows to defend, so they did not need mirror weapons. However, the professor believes that flaming arrows were familiar for the Roman navy; hence, they would defend themselves from attack. But, they did not know the mirror. They only saw a mirror, and suddenly their ships started to fire. Indeed, the mirror weapon was more effective than flaming arrows.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, so, therefore, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1457.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 298.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88926174497 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.25118519501 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530201342282 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 434.7 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.5558523113 49.2860985944 145% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.1333333333 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8666666667 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.4 7.06452816374 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.435335359954 0.272083759551 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136180550883 0.0996497079465 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0827087924754 0.0662205650399 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258527000045 0.162205337803 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0486621624899 0.0443174109184 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => 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.