Tpo 32 integrated
Both the passage and the lecture discuss what might have caused the strange sound called “quackers” picked up by the Russian submarines patrolling the North Alantic and Arctic Ocean. The author provides three pieces of evidence indicating that the odd sounds may be made by the orca whales, the giant squid, or other modern machines. However the speaker refutes them by offering three counterclaims.
First of all, the reading contends that the sound may come from the calls of male and female orca whales during a courtship ritual. Nevertheless, the professor challenges this point by mentioning that the submarine cannot pick up the sounds produced by the orca whales because submarine stayed deep under the sea whereas the orca whales live near the sea surface. Furthermore she explains that if the orca whales swim pass by the submarine, they will be correctly detected. Thus, the first viewpoint is unlikely right.
Second, the passage brings about the view that the sound may be caused by the giant squid. The professor, nonetheless, disagrees with that statement. She suggests that the giant squid is known for living there for decades even now, so if the sounds are produced by them, people should be able to pick up the sounds continuously. In contrast, the sounds disappeared for a long period time. As a result, the second theory is problematic.
Last but not least, the reading states that the sounds could be produced accidently by the military technology owned by other countries. Once again, the professor casts doubt on this point due to the fact that the odd sounds change the direction quickly but we don’t know any submarines invented are able to do so. Moreover, the engine of the submarines makes some noises, so if the strange sound originated from the submarine, the noises should be picked up as well. Consequently, The third hypothesis is unconvincing.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 345, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... giant squid, or other modern machines. However the speaker refutes them by offering th...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 365, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
... orca whales live near the sea surface. Furthermore she explains that if the orca whales sw...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, so, third, thus, well, whereas, in contrast, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => 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: 1592.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10256410256 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75550820064 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.570512820513 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.3661663552 49.2860985944 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.5 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.75 7.06452816374 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.396652304643 0.272083759551 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108870110606 0.0996497079465 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0797855624757 0.0662205650399 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.230091056879 0.162205337803 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0137024319048 0.0443174109184 31% => 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: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.