The main topic of both the reading and the lecture is about the main aim and meaning of the carved stone balls discovered in Scotland. The reading claims that due to several theories and explanations, no consensus was found with their aim and meaning by the archaeologists. The lecturer, on the other hand, not only categorically casts doubt on every single point raised by the author of the passage through citing three counter-arguments but also mentioned that none of the mentioned descriptions is enough convincing.
To begin with, the author establishes that due to the fact that several carved stone balls were discovered with pores, therefore, those were applied as weapons to hunt or fight. Conversely, the lecturer rebuts this idea, stating that common weapons such as arrowheads usually had some signs of wear; however, those balls did not have any sign. Also, the professor specifies that the surface of the balls was very well preserved and little or no damage was found on the surface.
Furthermore, the reading passage brings up this idea that the balls were put into use as a section of a primary system for measurements and weighing. In contrast, the lecturer supports a mutually exclusive view compared to that of the passage and declares that it is true that the balls were uniform in size; however, they had different masses and densities. This is because they were made of different materials. To be more specific, there were some balls with the same size and different masses, therefore, they could not be used for that purpose mentioned in the passage.
Eventually, the reading passage goes on to mention that the balls were used for social aims owing to having delicate designs. Notwithstanding, the lecturer specifies that some of the carved stone balls had very simple patterns which do not support the idea mentioned in the passage. Also, he points out that high-ranked and prestigious persons in that society usually were buried with their possessions; however, no carved stone balls were found in their grooves. Consequently, this idea was easily rejected by the lecturer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 275, 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.
... aim and meaning by the archaeologists. The lecturer, on the other hand, not only c...
^^^
Line 5, column 293, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: uniform
...res that it is true that the balls were uniform in size; however, they had different masses and...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...thstanding, the lecturer specifies that some of the carved stone balls had very simple patt...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, well, in contrast, such as, it is true, to begin with, 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: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1765.0 1373.03311258 129% => OK
No of words: 347.0 270.72406181 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08645533141 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31600926901 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73690871279 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50144092219 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 538.2 419.366225166 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5443201663 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.071428571 110.228320801 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7857142857 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.7142857143 7.06452816374 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.383382306279 0.272083759551 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135142506266 0.0996497079465 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0713342166852 0.0662205650399 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.238719732553 0.162205337803 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0673932865822 0.0443174109184 152% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.