Reading and lecture are discussing the authenticity of a European silver coin dated to the eleventh century, which was found at a Native American archaeological site. On the one hand, the writer refutes its genuine. On the other hand, the speaker casts doubts on the claims made by the writer, stating that his allegations are somewhat inaccurate when compared with real facts.
First, there is genuine evidence that Norse people came in contact with North Americans. Furthermore, many items discovered at the site were brought from far away places. This is because Americans used to travel long distances and they gathered various items from all the parts. Thus, this is a standpoint that gainsays the passage.
Second, Norse people did not settle down in North America. The writer says that archaeologists did not discover other coins, so Norse did not bring silver coins here. However, the speaker refutes this arguing that Norse people were just traveling towards Europe, and North America was just a travel point for them. When they decided to return to Europe, they packed up valuable things, including silver coins. So, this counter-argument contradicts author's point of view.
Third, it is true that silver coins had no commercial value in America. Nevertheless, Americans were passionate about beautiful, unique and interesting objects. In other words, they might have found these coins attractive, and therefore used them to make necklaces or different types of jewelries. Consequently, the silver coin may be authentic. In conclusion, the author and the lecturer seem to be in total disagreement regarding this topic.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 236, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s used to travel long distances and they gathered various items from all the part...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, regarding, second, so, then, therefore, third, thus, in conclusion, in other words, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1379.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 259.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32432432432 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74669654585 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.637065637066 0.540411800872 118% => OK
syllable_count: 420.3 419.366225166 100% => 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: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.4476335636 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.1176470588 110.228320801 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2352941176 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5294117647 7.06452816374 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.430983720146 0.272083759551 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.116845483913 0.0996497079465 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0922394305545 0.0662205650399 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227352545747 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0240700233499 0.0443174109184 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.98 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.