TPO 36
The reading proposes three facts to illustrate that the copper cylinder is not an ancient battery. The professor, however, refutes each of the points made in the reading.
One fact is that there are no wires or some conductors for the so-called battery near the vessels. But from the listening we know that the professor pointed out these vessels were excavated by local people who are not trained archaeologists at all, so they might consider conductors are not important and just look over them.
Secondly, in the reading, it is regarded as a scroll holder as its shape is like copper cylinders found in the ruins of Seleucia. And the professor thought, this time, true it is like a scroll holder, people could not prove it does work it. Scientists discovered if put iron or some liquid with it together, the currents will appear. she then elaborates even if it was designed for a scroll holder, ancient people may find another use of the object.
The last opinion in the reading is a question, how ancient men did with electricity. While the professor explains that when a man touches the copper cylinder, it will make a tinkle, which would be used for something. Besides she continues to illustrate that ancient people have already used electricity to heal the illness and ease the pain. so this opinion is wrong
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 334, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
... it together, the currents will appear. she then elaborates even if it was designed...
^^^
Line 4, column 217, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Besides,
...kle, which would be used for something. Besides she continues to illustrate that ancien...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 342, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: So
... to heal the illness and ease the pain. so this opinion is wrong
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, however, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => 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: 1092.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 228.0 270.72406181 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.78947368421 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88582923847 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55741999782 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.635964912281 0.540411800872 118% => OK
syllable_count: 336.6 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.3293503152 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.91666666667 7.06452816374 84% => 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: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 10.6 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 63.6247240618 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.