TPO 30- A little over 2200 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 copper surface curved to focus the Sun’s rays onto Roman ships, causing them to catch fire. However, we have several reasons to suspect that the story of the burning mirror is just a myth and the Greeks of Syracuse never really built such a device.
The reading and lecture are both about a weapon used by Greeks to fight Roman Ships which is called "burning mirror". The author of the reading believes that the burning mirror was not build at all to combat the Romans. However, the lecturer casts doubts about the claims made in the article and refutes all the theories presented.
First of all, the author of the reading points out that the Greeks are not well equipped with technology to build the burning mirror. The article notes that the device needs a precise parabolic curvature in order to set ships on fire. The point is challenged by the lecturer. She says that they don't need a single sheet of mirror to make a parabolic curvature. Furthermore, she argues that dozen of small polish copper can build mirror itself and the parabolic shape.
Secondly, the device can set ships on fire in a long manner and it is very time consuming. The article establishes that the target needs to be perfectly still in order for it to be set on fire and it is impossible for ships to be unmoving vessel. However, the lecturer rebuts this argument. She suggests that in their experiment it is possible to set the ship on fire for 10 minutes. Moreover, she elaborates on this by mentioning that the Roman ship was build with other materials that are easily flammable which is "pitch" and it sets fire within seconds. In addition, this material can be easily be set on fire even if the vessel is moving.
Finally, the author states that Greeks has already a weapon that is already effective known as flaming arrow. The article denotes that Greeks don't need to build burning mirror because they can set ships on fire with their flaming arrow. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that Romans are familiar with arrow and they don't see arrow burning their ships.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 296, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ged by the lecturer. She says that they dont need a single sheet of mirror to make a...
^^^^
Line 3, column 429, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t dozen of small polish copper can build mirror itself and the parabolic shape. ...
^^
Line 5, column 44, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a long manner" with adverb for "long"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ondly, the device can set ships on fire in a long manner and it is very time consuming. The arti...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 143, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... arrow. The article denotes that Greeks dont need to build burning mirror because th...
^^^^
Line 7, column 323, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...Romans are familiar with arrow and they dont see arrow burning their ships.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, still, well, in addition, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => 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: 1515.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 319.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74921630094 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46827334509 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.46394984326 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 465.3 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.2078928143 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.1176470588 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7647058824 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.76470588235 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 4.45695364238 247% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.37407263674 0.272083759551 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123418551859 0.0996497079465 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0737624960171 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232717654212 0.162205337803 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0314355200986 0.0443174109184 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 13.3589403974 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.27 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.65 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.