The passage and lecture are arguing about the function of the carved stone balls. The author lists out three possible theories to explain this matter. On the contrary, the lecturer believes that all these theories are unconvincing and she challenges proposed theories one by one.
First, the passage author mentions that, these stone objects were used for fighting and hunting. In contrast, the lecturer refuses this point and she states that the other weapons like arrows had sing for hunting while there is no sign on these stones. Therefore, these objects were not used as weapons.
Second, the passage states another theory; these stone objects were used for system of weight. The lecturer, however, holds an opposing view and she asserts that these stone objects were not proper for using system of weight, since they are made of different stones. In better words, although these stone objects are the same shape, they have different weight since they are made of different stone with different densities. Therefore, these the same shaped stones were not the same weight which is improtant for system of weight.
Finally, based on the passage, these stone objects had had a social purpose. On the other hand, the lecturer rebuts this theory and she points out the disigns of these stones were too simple for using as social marked. Furthermore, there was a custom that, when a person died her/his social mark was buried with her/him, while none of these object have been found in tomb or graves. Hence, these object were not uses as social marks.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The passage and lecture are arguing abou...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...enges proposed theories one by one. First, the passage author mentions that,...
^^^
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: HAD_VBP[1]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'sung'.
Suggestion: sung
... that the other weapons like arrows had sing for hunting while there is no sign on t...
^^^^
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'sung'.
Suggestion: sung
... that the other weapons like arrows had sing for hunting while there is no sign on t...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...se objects were not used as weapons. Second, the passage states another theor...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... is improtant for system of weight. Finally, based on the passage, these sto...
^^
Line 7, column 54, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: had
...sed on the passage, these stone objects had had a social purpose. On the other hand, th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, second, so, therefore, while, in contrast, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => 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: 1303.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 260.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01153846154 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.13985496937 2.5805825403 83% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.511538461538 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 396.9 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.9574816868 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.0714285714 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5714285714 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.35714285714 7.06452816374 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.259647648235 0.272083759551 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111601512747 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518641598315 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16397972261 0.162205337803 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0530920103003 0.0443174109184 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.