tpo 43
Question: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific theories presented in the reading passage.
agnostids as a group of marine animals, How may have lived
The listening and the reading materials have a debate on how primitive agnostids may have leaved. The writer puts forward 3 hypothesises which are refuted by following speaker.
First, the writer suggests that these animals probably have acquired their foods through swimming and hunting other small animals. On the other hand, the speaker views this issue from an opposite angle. According to him,some huge agnostids had large and well-developed eyes but others were blind. As a result, this theory is weak because not only they could not rely on their eyes and free-swimming as a way for achieving food sources, but they also needed to other sensitive organs for this goal and this kind of events were not seen in fossil discoveries.
The second reason offered by writer is that agnostids may have settled on seafloor and obtained their food from debris of other creatures. On the contrary, the speaker casts doubt on this assumption by saying that if these animals attached on seafloor, they could not move fast to far distances and spread to various geographic areas. Thus, this proposal is in direct contrast with their pretty fast expansion all over the world.
Lastly, the writer opposes that they may have acted as parasites for providing food by living on others animals. However, the speaker holds an opposite view. He explains that existence of large population of agnostids shows that if they were parasite, they would kill too many of other organisms. Furthermore, it is not advisable that we assume great population of agnostids as parasites.
Overall, the ideas mentioned in the listening lecture counter the ideas in the reading passage in that the professor claims agnostids could not be free- swimming predators, seafloor dwellers or parasites according to above reasons.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 69, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hat these animals probably have acquired their foods through swimming and hunting...
^^
Line 5, column 221, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , some
...from an opposite angle. According to him,some huge agnostids had large and well-devel...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, second, so, thus, well, kind of, as a result, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1518.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19863013699 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57891947739 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568493150685 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 419.366225166 109% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => 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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.0459432945 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.428571429 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8571428571 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.78571428571 7.06452816374 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
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: 0.391446475768 0.272083759551 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12629906934 0.0996497079465 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0874525723448 0.0662205650399 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.209189723625 0.162205337803 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0611995383002 0.0443174109184 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.