The reading and the lecture are both about the "burning mirror" which is an ingenious weapon used by Greeks to defend themselves when the Roman navy attacked the port city of Syracuse. The author of the reading believes that most probably the use of this weapon is just a myth, whereas the lecturer explains the reasons why this weapon is most probably had been used by greeks.
First of all the author claims that the Greeks were not technologically advanced enough to think about such elaborated weapon. He mentions the fact that in order to set the ships on fire they would have built mirrors several meters wide. Furthermore, the Greeks had to have an advanced knowledge of geometry, which was not existing in that period. The lecturer contrast this claim and explains that the mirrors could have been built using many small pieces put together as an experiment has shown.
Second, the author contends that the time necessary to catch the ship on fire is too long to be possible, it mentions an experiment which shows that 10 minutes are required to burn a still piece of wood at a distance of 30 meters. the lecturer rebuts this claim saying that the mirrors were used to catch on fire other materials such as the pitch which gets on fire very quickly and then the fire spread around, therefore this weapon can be very effective.
Finally, the author says that the mirror can be compared to the already used burning arrows, so there was no reason to use the mirrors. The lecturer, on the other hand, explains that there are some advantages in using mirrors, for example, the mirrors do not show fire as the burning arrows do, then mirrors are more surprising than a burning arrow.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 232, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...ece of wood at a distance of 30 meters. the lecturer rebuts this claim saying that ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, second, so, still, then, therefore, whereas, for example, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => 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: 1408.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 297.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74074074074 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.3898846642 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531986531987 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 428.4 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 45.1974556806 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.8 110.228320801 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.7 21.698381199 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.2 7.06452816374 187% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.414451227805 0.272083759551 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.171965211359 0.0996497079465 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0590457390832 0.0662205650399 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.248894652422 0.162205337803 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0699799512919 0.0443174109184 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.96 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 11.0289183223 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.8 12.2367328918 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.