TPO31
Both the reading and lecture discuss whether the fossil evidence found in volcanic ash present the Singosauropteryx had feathers or not. While the writer states that the pattern of fine lines do not represent this kind of dinosaur had feathers, the lecture casts doubt on the claims made in the article. She believes that the fossil records strongly proof that they were feathered-dinosaurs.
First of all, the author claims that there is no evidence to indicate fine lines represent the functional structures of a living dinosaur, maybe they had formed after they had died. Their skin might be decomposed into fiber and fiber turned into lines in the fossil records. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She asserts that the lines are not the result of skin decomposition. Furthermore, she says that since decomposition of other animals has not been seen, it truly presents that feather's functional structure kept unchanged in the ash.
The next point brought up is that fossil records do not show what part of the dinosaur structure they are. They might be fossilized frills rather than remains of the feather. However, the professor says that feathers contain a special protein which cannot be found in the frills. Since this kind of dinosaur did have this protein, it did have feathers.
Finally, the author mentions that the functional feature of feathers is to help the animal fly or to regulate internal temperature while the shreds of evidence show that the feathers were in the backbone and tail of this species. The lecture, on the other hand, argues that feather can have another function such as an approach to display.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... that they were feathered-dinosaurs. First of all, the author claims that the...
^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...structure kept unchanged in the ash. The next point brought up is that fossil...
^^
Line 5, column 123, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nosaur structure they are. They might be fossilized frills rather than remains of...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... this protein, it did have feathers. Finally, the author mentions that the fu...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, however, may, so, while, kind of, such as, first of all, 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: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1375.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03663003663 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67531203339 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542124542125 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 406.8 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.6305646979 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.2142857143 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35714285714 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
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: 0.414683178432 0.272083759551 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.128203636 0.0996497079465 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0580233887415 0.0662205650399 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236716119493 0.162205337803 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0703842773756 0.0443174109184 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => 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: 11.95 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => 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.