TPO34
The reading passage and lecture have conflicting opinions about what caused the extinction of Steller's sea cow. The article strongly postulates that there are three compelling assumptions of this question. On the other hand, the listening adamantly delineates that none of the author's theories is accurate.
First and foremost, according to the speaker in the lecture, these creatures were enormous almost ten tons at that time. Furthermore, the Siberian native people were not many at that time, so they did not use a great number of sea cow in their daily lives. Nonetheless, the author offsets these points by declaring that overhunting might have caused their extinction because the native inhabitants used their meat to survive in the harsh climate.
On top of this, the professor further asserts that there was no evidence of the author's theory. If the environmental changes had adversely affected the kelp population which was the main food of sea cows, they would have had to influence other ecosystems, not only kelp population. To be more specific, the whales were also big mammal at that time; however, there were no reports of other marine whale's preys had declined because of environmental issues. These claims refute the writer's implications about ecosystem disruption might have caused a dramatic decrease in the kelp population. Thus it was clear that the sea cows primarily relied on these creatures.
Lastly, the speaker in the lecture suggests that according to the evidence, before european traders' arrival, the sea cows had already declined for hundreds of years. Hence, there was no connection between fur merchants and decrease their population. Nevertheless, the author counters these indications by insisting that european fur traders arrived on the island after 1741. Since that time, the sea cows population dramatically decreased by thousands of numbers. Therefore, these fur traders eliminated their population because they had plenty of armaments.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 81, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...serts that there was no evidence of the authors theory. If the environmental changes ha...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 590, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...amatic decrease in the kelp population. Thus it was clear that the sea cows primaril...
^^^^
Line 7, column 93, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'traders'' or 'trader's'?
Suggestion: traders'; trader's
...ording to the evidence, before european traders arrival, the sea cows had already decli...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 401, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'cows'' or 'cow's'?
Suggestion: cows'; cow's
...nd after 1741. Since that time, the sea cows population dramatically decreased by th...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, nonetheless, so, therefore, thus, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 5.01324503311 279% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1677.0 1373.03311258 122% => OK
No of words: 310.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40967741935 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75700790929 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564516129032 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.4331043661 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.8125 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.375 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.4375 7.06452816374 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.393259506624 0.272083759551 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121269576854 0.0996497079465 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0901172003724 0.0662205650399 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.230017104927 0.162205337803 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0244826170578 0.0443174109184 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 53.8541721854 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.91 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.