Both the reading and the passage is about whether the Greeks utilized a burning mirror while the Roman navy attacked them. The passage mentions three reasons explaining this claim is wrong. However, the professor casts doubt on every each evidence.
To begin with, the reading asserts that making the burning mirror need a several meter mirror in curve shape. This device needs an advanced technology that Greeks did not have. Therefore, it is impossible that they produce such as this weapon. In the opposition, the author declares that they did not need a curve big mirror because they could use a dozen of small flat mirror. They could make a big burning mirror by using of small ones.
In addition, the writer implies that this device needs a long time to ignite the ships. In an experiment it takes 10 minutes for a burning mirror to set a wood on fire. The roman ship was moving, thus, it is impossible for the Greeks to use this weapon. Conversely, the lecturer points out that the roman ships were not just made of wood. Their ships had a sticky substance that makes the burning easier even the ships was moving.
Finally, the reading alludes that the Greeks had flaming arrows which was effective at the same distance as the burning mirror. Hence, they did not need the burning mirror. In the contrary, the professor refuses this claim by explaining that burning mirror was more surprising that flame arrows, thus, it was more beneficial for the Greeks.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, hence, however, so, therefore, thus, while, in addition, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1220.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.8031496063 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.24999913889 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.515748031496 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 367.2 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.094586771 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 76.25 110.228320801 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.875 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 7.06452816374 88% => 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 : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.416231498606 0.272083759551 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.141838065384 0.0996497079465 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0829275619188 0.0662205650399 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.244233660259 0.162205337803 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0585122460488 0.0443174109184 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.1 13.3589403974 68% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 73.17 53.8541721854 136% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 11.0289183223 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.26 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.55 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 63.6247240618 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.2008830022 62% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.