tpo 33
The reading discusses several theories about practical applications of carved stone balls, found in Scotland, in the lives of people of that time. However, the lecturer finds the ideas dubious and casts that on each theory proposed by the reading passage.
First, the other argues that these carved stone balls might have been used as a means of hunting or fighting and defending against enemies. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that these stones could not have been used for these purposes since it has no cracks and fractures and the surface is well preserved. If it were used for this purpose, it would certainly be damaged.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that carved stone balls might have been used for measurement of food or other quantities. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that although these stones have the same size, they do not maintain the same weight. So, it is not reasonable to think that they could be applied for weighting purposes.
Finally, the reading passage asserts that these ornamented stones might have had social aims and might have determined their owner social level. In contrast, the speaker dismisses the issue because the patterns carved on the balls were elementary. Moreover, whenever an eminent member of society died, they will be buried with their possessions. As these stones were not in their tombs or graves, it is not possible that they were used as a tool for distinguishing the community level.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, well, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1243.0 1373.03311258 91% => OK
No of words: 247.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03238866397 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96437052324 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49694858771 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.550607287449 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 376.2 419.366225166 90% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.3873146048 49.2860985944 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.583333333 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5833333333 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.439896218194 0.272083759551 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.158187015977 0.0996497079465 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.081116211156 0.0662205650399 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.264780746236 0.162205337803 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0779563403352 0.0443174109184 176% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.