TPO-30 - Integrated Writing Task A little over 2,200 years ago, the Roman navy attacked the Greek port city of Syracuse. According to some ancient historians, the Greeks defended themselves with an ingenious weapon called a "burning mirror": a polished co

the reading passage asserts it was impossible for the ancient Greeks to have build the device called "burning mirror" for three reasons, however, the speaker provides three opposing opinions which prove the existence of the weapon.
first, it is claimed by the writer that greeks did not own the advanced technology to construct the "burning mirror". whereas the listening material argues that it was not necessarily built with a single copper. Instead, the weapon could be assembled by several pieces of smaller copper, which was feasible with the skills the Greeks have. in this case, the first point in the passage is false.
second, the passage regards the speed of setting fire of the weapon as too slow to be practical, which, according to the professor, fails to stand since it is based on the wrong assumption that the "burning mirror" aimed at firing the wood. Other materials on the boat such as the sticky pitch could catch the fire much faster and would spread it to other parts when moving. therefore, the second statement falls apart.
third, the "burning mirror" is considered of no value since the greek army were already equipped with the other similar weapon which had the equal effect, as the author puts it. Nevertheless, the speaker rebuts with the fact that the enemies might be ready for the attack from the flaming arrows, which indicates that it is more surprising and effective to fight them with the relatively novel, and seemingly harmless copper mirrors. as we can see, the last perspective is not convincing.

Votes
Average: 8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
the reading passage asserts it was impossib...
^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: First
...ich prove the existence of the weapon. first, it is claimed by the writer that greek...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 128, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Whereas
...nstruct the 'burning mirror'. whereas the listening material argues that it w...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 128, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...nstruct the 'burning mirror'. whereas the listening material argues that it w...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 350, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: In
...asible with the skills the Greeks have. in this case, the first point in the passa...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Second
...e first point in the passage is false. second, the passage regards the speed of setti...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 385, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
...d spread it to other parts when moving. therefore, the second statement falls apart. thi...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Third
...ore, the second statement falls apart. third, the 'burning mirror' is cons...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 444, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: As
... and seemingly harmless copper mirrors. as we can see, the last perspective is not...
^^
Line 4, column 499, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the last perspective is not convincing.
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, whereas, as to, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => 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: 1325.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 259.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11583011583 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69858483872 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606177606178 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 389.7 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.4449783226 49.2860985944 155% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.454545455 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5454545455 21.698381199 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 4.19205298013 239% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.342206496372 0.272083759551 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110067088803 0.0996497079465 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0748748100828 0.0662205650399 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.206455443415 0.162205337803 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0182997854601 0.0443174109184 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.