TPO 47 - integrated
Both the author and the lecturer are about the ability of pterosaurs to fly. The author believes that these animals were not able to fly for some specific reasons. The lecturer, on the other hand, thinks that reasons given by the lecture are not conveincing, and pterosaurs may have been able to fly.
First of all, the author mentions that pterosaurs were cold-blooded animals. It has been mentioned that they had slow metabolism and they were not capable of producing the energy needed for flying. The lecturer rebuts this claim. She mentions that these animals had dense hair covering and only warm-blooded animals can have this feature. Therefore, they might have been able to produce the volume of energy needed to fly.
Secondly, the author states that pterosaurs were too heavy for flying. This point is challeneged by the lecturer. She argues that recent researches have shown that their bones were hollow instead of solid. Hence, they did not have a heavy weight in regard to their unusual anatomical feature.
Finally, the author contends that pterosaurs may needed huge and powerful muscles in their back legs to fly. It is mentioned that birds use their back legs to run and jump, therefore they have strong legs to fly. The lecturer, however, states that birds only have two legs, but pterosaurs have four legs and they may not need powerful legs as birds do. Actually, she suggests that because they use all four legs, they can push for the fly and run and jump with all of their legs not just two of them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 234, Rule ID: HEAVY_WEIGHT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'heavyweight'?
Suggestion: heavyweight
...ad of solid. Hence, they did not have a heavy weight in regard to their unusual anatomical f...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, first of all, in regard to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => 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: 1267.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 265.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.78113207547 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.18954439635 2.5805825403 85% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 145.348785872 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.471698113208 0.540411800872 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 379.8 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.5255352849 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.1875 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5625 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.375 7.06452816374 119% => 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: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.417206180189 0.272083759551 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142361686617 0.0996497079465 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0639610712309 0.0662205650399 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.254088100677 0.162205337803 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0291752480279 0.0443174109184 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.4 13.3589403974 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 53.8541721854 134% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.15 12.2367328918 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.11 8.42419426049 84% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 63.6247240618 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.2008830022 62% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.