TPO47
The professor revises the idea presented in the passage that Pterosaurs were not able to fly by flapping their wings and refutes each of the points made in the text.
First of all, the reading passage suggests that Pterosaurs might be cold-blooded due to the fact that their descendants - modern reptiles - are cold-blooded. As a result, they did not have enough energy for powered flight. Conversely, the professor explains that new discoveries have shown that Pterosaurs had a dense hair-like covering that is typical to warm-blooded animals. Thus, they could maintain their body temperature in extreme climate and probably were capable of power flight. Hence, the first theory has some deficiencies regarding the main point of the passage.
Secondly, the professor's opinion contradicts the second reason mentioned in the passage that Pterosaurs were immensely heavy and could not flap their wings fast enough. She states that Pterosaurs were actually light due to the several anatomical features that they had. For instance, Pterosaurs had hollow light-weight bones, and this characteristic kept them airborne. Thus, the second explanation does not hold true due to the lack of compelling evidence.
Finally, the passage argues that in order to take off from the ground, Pterosaurs, like birds, needed powerful muscles in their back legs, but there is no strong muscle regarding their fossilized back leg bones. On the other hand, the professor clarifies that Pterosaurs are different from the birds. While birds use two limbs to push off the ground, Pterosaurs used all their four limbs to launch themselves into the air. Therefore, even the largest kinds of Pterosaurs were fast enough to run or jump high enough to take off. So, the third reason is not convincing, too.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 15, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...n point of the passage. Secondly, the professors opinion contradicts the second reason m...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, conversely, finally, first, hence, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thus, while, for instance, 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 : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1498.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 285.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25614035088 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70239104492 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610526315789 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.5096924068 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.8666666667 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.7333333333 7.06452816374 166% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.475003739497 0.272083759551 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13881391768 0.0996497079465 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0774936464433 0.0662205650399 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.267889975073 0.162205337803 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0612383779932 0.0443174109184 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
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: 13.23 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.