Both the reading and the lecture are taking about theories of the purpose od carved stone balls, but the speaker disagrees with all the three perspective theories made in the reading because none of them are convincing.
To begin with, the reading claims that the carved stone balls are weapons for hunting or fighting. However, the professor objects it with a new proof. She then points out that they should have signs of wear like axes, however, the surface of carved stone balls are well persevered which shows there are little or no damages. That's why this theory is challenged heavily.
Furthermore, according to the passage, the carved stone balls can be used as primitive system of weights and measures. On the contrary, the speaker asserts that though they have similar sizes, the masses are in fact different because they are made of different types of stones with different density.
Finally, the theory that they are served as social purpose is opposed by the speaker. She then tells that many evidences are inconsistent with this theory. Though some patterns are elaborate, many others are too simple. What's more, we haven't found any carved stone balls in tombs or graves which can show the status of a person. Therefore, the carved stone balls cannot be a symbol of social status.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 326, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...h shows there are little or no damages. Thats why this theory is challenged heavily. ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 106, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...osed by the speaker. She then tells that many evidences are inconsistent with thi...
^^
Line 7, column 222, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
... elaborate, many others are too simple. Whats more, we havent found any carved stone ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 237, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
...y others are too simple. Whats more, we havent found any carved stone balls in tombs o...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, furthermore, however, if, so, then, therefore, well, in fact, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1086.0 1373.03311258 79% => OK
No of words: 219.0 270.72406181 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95890410959 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.84690116678 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.31984143184 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 145.348785872 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.584474885845 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 332.1 419.366225166 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.8831039278 49.2860985944 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.5 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.25 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.83333333333 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.443349100427 0.272083759551 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.154516106186 0.0996497079465 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0962895324814 0.0662205650399 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.259911330435 0.162205337803 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0711707815994 0.0443174109184 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.