TPO 32
The main idea of both the passage and the talk is about the source of "quackers". Considering this, the author offers three theories have to with the source of those strange sounds. The professor, on the other hand, not only refutes the author's assessment, but also asserts that the announced option runs counter to the ways the reading just discussed. The lecturer demonstrates three reasons to reject the points in the passage.
The first criticism of the passage against which the lecture argues is that those noises came from male and female ocra whales. As stated by the professor, this idea is unlikely due to the fact that even though ocra lives in the area that Russian submarines patrolling, ocra whales live near the surface of ocean, while Russian submarines were on deep area, and it was not possible to hear and detect those sounds on deep parts of ocean.
Moreover, unlike the reading which claims that giant squids were the source of the noises, the professor illustrates that the noises, first time, were reported in 1930, and the sounds were detected only for two decades. However, if squids were the source of those sounds, the sounds should be continued until now. Therefore, it is a fallacious conclusion that we consider that the sounds were created by squids.
Finally, the lecture contradicts the fallacy of the passage that secret submarines were the reason of those noises, saying that the sounds were heard around Russian submarines. So, if foreign submarines created those sounds Russian submarines could detect them due to the sound of submarine's engine. Additionally, the noises changed their directions quickly. As stated by the professor, up to now, the technology that gives submarines a chance to alter their directions quickly and enjoy a silent engine, has not presented.
All in all, the professor maintains that there some problems have to with arguments mentioned in the reading, and none of them are convincing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 248, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...on the other hand, not only refutes the authors assessment, but also asserts that the a...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 2, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...to reject the points in the passage. The first criticism of the passage against ...
^^^
Line 4, column 178, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[4]
Message: “So , if” 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.
...s were heard around Russian submarines. So, if foreign submarines created those sounds...
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'so', 'therefore', 'while', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.228260869565 0.261695866417 87% => OK
Verbs: 0.152173913043 0.158904122519 96% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0652173913043 0.0723426182421 90% => OK
Adverbs: 0.054347826087 0.0435111971325 125% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0190217391304 0.0277247811725 69% => OK
Prepositions: 0.130434782609 0.128828473217 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0380434782609 0.0370669169778 103% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.65211076224 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0244565217391 0.0208969081088 117% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.152173913043 0.128158765124 119% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0054347826087 0.0158828679856 34% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0135869565217 0.0114777025283 118% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1967.0 1645.83664459 120% => OK
No of words: 323.0 271.125827815 119% => OK
Chars per words: 6.08978328173 6.08160592843 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.04852973271 105% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.38080495356 0.374372842146 102% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.263157894737 0.287516216867 92% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.157894736842 0.187439937562 84% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.114551083591 0.113142543107 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65211076224 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529411764706 0.539623497131 98% => OK
Word variations: 55.3257503397 53.8517498576 103% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0529801325 107% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0714285714 21.7502111507 106% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.8228175562 49.3711431718 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.5 132.220823453 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0714285714 21.7502111507 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.785714285714 0.878197800319 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.39072847682 88% => OK
Readability: 49.3872180451 50.5018328374 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.75903614458 1.90840788429 92% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.766375936752 0.549887131256 139% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.175965234572 0.142949733639 123% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0743211353932 0.0787303798458 94% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.713059239928 0.631733273073 113% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.145502499993 0.139662658121 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.402770493945 0.266732575781 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0980656396043 0.103435571967 95% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.415292737625 0.414875509568 100% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.10362688446 0.0530846634433 195% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.546878385757 0.40443939384 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0977518078078 0.0528353158467 185% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.26048565121 117% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 3.49668874172 114% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.62251655629 138% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 3.1766004415 126% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 10.2958057395 126% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.