TPO44 Integrated
Both the reading and the lecture discuss the validity of several archaeological evidence that the Norse met Native Americans in ancient times. While the author of the reading contends that all of these are unconvincing, the lecturer challenges what is mentioned by the author and argues that these are real evidence. In addition, she says that these could indeed prove the connection between the Norse and Native Americans. The lecturer provides several reasons to support her arguments.
First of all, the author points out that the distance between Norse dwellings in eastern Canada was too far, which suggests that the coin had no connection with Norse. Nevertheless, the speaker casts doubt on the idea by saying that the Norse tended to bring the items they found in other areas back to their settlements. Furthermore, many historical objects found in their settlements in eastern Canada was exactly what they had found. Hence, these coins did have relationships with the Norse.
Secondly, the writer claims that no other coins have been found at the Canadian sites lived by the Norse. The professor, however, rebuts this by asserting that when the Norse went back to Europe, they would pack all the valuable items and brought them back. Because they must knew the coins were valuable, they would bring these coin back. Consequently, the argument from the author is not true.
Last but not least, it is stated in the passage that sliver coins had no value for Native Americans, so the Norse is unlikely to bring them as money. The scholar, on the other hand, implies that the sliver coins were actually beautiful. She elaborates on the idea that these coins could be used to make necklaces or luxury items. Therefore, the Norse could utilize the coins to trade with Native Americans. As a result, this can show there was a connection between the Norse and Native Americans.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, as to, in addition, as a result, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1582.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02222222222 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46845352125 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520634920635 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 475.2 419.366225166 113% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.1358888812 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.0588235294 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5294117647 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3529411765 7.06452816374 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.421492713732 0.272083759551 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135128155202 0.0996497079465 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0895980263574 0.0662205650399 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.249897484041 0.162205337803 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0973212190516 0.0443174109184 220% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
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: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.