Both the passage and the lecture offer opposing views on the whether the silver coin discovered at a Native American archaeological site really came through Norse travelers or if it is not an authentic artifact. While the reading argues that many archaeologists believe that the coin is fake, the lecturer totally repudiates this claim and rejects their reasoning put forward by the text.
First of all, the article mentions that the coin does not have any link with the Norse origin as the place of discovery of the coin is far from Norse settlements in two different countries. The lecturer, however, refutes this claim by saying that the history has many items discovered from distant places. Additionally, she posits that the Native Americans used to travel to different places and might have gone to the Norse settlements too.
Besides this, the reading contends that Norse did not bring any silver coin with them as none have been discovered even in the places of their settlements in North America. In contrary, the professor believes that it may be possibility that they brought the coins and took them back when they returned. So, clearly, there is a disparity between the text and arguments put forth by the lecturer.
Finally, the text argues that Norse might not have brought any silver coin to North America as they would have thought of silver coins being not in demand in there. However, the speaker again casts doubt on this claim saying that North Americans have been known to value the attractive objects and they would have traded silver coin with the Norse to use as jewelry objects.
To summarize, while both reading and lecture provide interesting information with regard to the authenticity of the coin and its link with Norse travelers, the passage fails to justify the claim towards the lecturer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 259, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es this claim by saying that the history has many items discovered from distant p...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, finally, first, however, if, may, really, so, then, while, first of all, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => 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: 1528.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 306.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99346405229 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4989809534 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509803921569 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 465.3 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 39.8503398577 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.909090909 110.228320801 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8181818182 21.698381199 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.72727272727 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.511224592691 0.272083759551 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.200000753924 0.0996497079465 201% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.117672340268 0.0662205650399 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.285384409558 0.162205337803 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0951379909388 0.0443174109184 215% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.3589403974 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 53.8541721854 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.0289183223 114% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 10.7273730684 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.