TPO 30, integrated
The article states that 2200 years ago Greeks used an ingenious weapon, in front of Roman attack, which was called "burning mirror" made by a big mirror to focus the Sun's rays and burned the ships, and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor says that the mentioned reasons in the article are not convincing then she refutes all of them.
Firs, the reading claims that ancient Greeks did not have enough technology to make such a huge mirror with precise parabolic curvature. The professor opposes this point by saying that the weapon was not necessarily one sheet. They had science to make many small pieces of parabolic mirrors and attach them to make a big curved mirror.
Second, the passage asserts that it would have taken a long time to burn a ship with a burning mirror. In an experiment, it took ten minutes to burn a stand wooden object from 30 meters distance, so it was impractical in battle. In contrast, the lecturer says that the ships were made from various materials which took a shorter time to be burned by Sun's rays; like "pitch" that was used to seal the ship from the water.
Third, the text mentions that the Greeks had better weapons like flaming arrows. Therefore, there was no reason to build the burning mirror. On the contrary, the professor states that there were some advantages of using the burning mirror. For example, the Romans were able to see thrown fires of the arrows, but they could not see anything when Greeks used a burning mirror.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, second, so, then, therefore, third, for example, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => 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: 1261.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 262.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.81297709924 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45404413462 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576335877863 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 377.1 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.9251523116 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.083333333 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8333333333 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 7.06452816374 107% => 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 : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.522942601518 0.272083759551 192% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.187385567252 0.0996497079465 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0988172147906 0.0662205650399 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.298674299798 0.162205337803 184% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0405973430774 0.0443174109184 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 53.8541721854 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 12.2367328918 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.