The lecturer disputes the author's suggested theory carved stone balls served as weapons during the Neolithic period. He provides several reasons to cast doubt about the author's claims
First, according to the reading the carved stones ball may have served as weapons for hunting or fighting. The speaker find this idea debatable. He asserts that if they have been used for this purpose, some cracks would have appeared on their surface. However, the discovered artifacts were more preserved in shape with no tears or wears. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that they have been used to hunt for animals.
The lecturer contradicts the fallacy of the passage that since carved stone balls had similar sizes, they might have been used as scales to measure food's weights. The lecturer contends that, theoretically speaking, it is unlikely that stones were used as scales since each one is made of a different kind of stone which has different density. Thus, obviously, they cannot be used as a weighing measurement tool.
Finally, the author argues that the stones have different designed to show the social status of people possessing them. Again the lecturer refutes these claims by stating that an analyses of stones showed that they have different patterns which might not represent the social status of the owners. Similarly, the stones were not found in the caves which indicate that they had no value as a valuable possession items
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 59, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o the reading the carved stones ball may have served as weapons for hunting or fi...
^^
Line 3, column 121, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'finds'.
Suggestion: finds
...ns for hunting or fighting. The speaker find this idea debatable. He asserts that if...
^^^^
Line 7, column 177, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'an analysis' or simply 'analyses'?
Suggestion: an analysis; analyses
...er refutes these claims by stating that an analyses of stones showed that they have differe...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, similarly, so, therefore, thus, kind of
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 : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
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: 1207.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 236.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11440677966 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91947592106 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38288975876 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.576271186441 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 369.9 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.1376751974 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.583333333 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6666666667 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.08333333333 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.457863000133 0.272083759551 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.162890061704 0.0996497079465 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0850707589118 0.0662205650399 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.26982116412 0.162205337803 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0552973784699 0.0443174109184 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.