The United Kingdom (sometimes referred to as Britain) has a long and rich history of human settlement. Traces of buildings, tools, and art can be found from periods going back many thousands of years: from the Stone Age, through the Bronze Age, the Iron Age, the time of the Roman colonization, the Middle Ages, up to the beginnings of the industrial age. Yet for most of the twentieth century, the science of archaeology,dedicated to uncovering and studying old cultural artifacts,was faced with serious problems and limitations in Britain.
First, many valuable artifacts were lost to construction projects. The growth of Britain's population, especially from the 1950s on, spurred a lot of new construction in British cities, towns, and villages. While digging foundations for new buildings, the builders often uncovered archaeologically valuable sites.Usually, however, they proceeded with the construction and did not preserve the artifacts. Many archaeologically precious artifacts were therefore destroyed.
Second, many archaeologists felt that the financial support for archaeological research was inadequate. For most of the twentieth century, archaeology was funded mostly through government funds and grants, which allowed archaeologists to investigate a handful of the most important sites but which left hundreds of other interesting projects without support. Furthermore, changing government priorities brought about periodic reductions in funding.
Third, it was difficult to have a career in archaeology. Archaeology jobs were to be found at universities or with a few government agencies, but there were never many positions available. Many people who wanted to become archaeologists ended up pursuing other careers and contributing to archaeological research only as unpaid amateurs.
Both the lecture and the reading passage are discussing the problems faced by archaeologists in preserving artifacts. The former is of the opinion that there are no such problems in Britain. While the latter mentions three problems faced by the U.K in the 20th century regarding preservation of artifacts.
To begin with, the first issue we encounter is associated with the loss of valuable artifacts. The professor highlights that in 1990 new guidelines and rules were implemented in the U.K.,this improves the system. Additionally, before any construction, the construction site must be viewed by an archeologist. If there was some arceologogy benefit then the builder has to plan for preserving the artifact and have to document them. On the other hand, the text posits that during new constructions in the 1950's in villages and towns of Britain results in the loss of valuable artifacts because builders didn't bother to preserve them.
Moreover, another topic of the debate revolves around inadequate financial support . The speaker points out that any archaeological work was paid by the construction company, not by the government. Initial examination of the site , any preserving methods all are paid by the builder. However, the author mentions that archeologists felt that they got inadequate finacial help. This causes problems in the preservation of artifacts.
Thirdly, the final point of discussion is connected with the difficult career to adopt. The lecturer claims that there is a lot of paid work for arheologist like they have to examine the sites for approval.. Furthermore, If there is any archeological valuable, then they help in preserving them, process the data etc. This has increases the number of jobs for the professional. Nevertheless, the passage states that there were no adequate jobs for them that's why people are reluctant in persuing archeology.
To conclude, it is quite visible that the author and the lecturer had conflicting views about preservation of artifacts. They are having trouble finding common grounds for this issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 192, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... there are no such problems in Britain. While the latter mentions three problems face...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 248, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: K
... mentions three problems faced by the U.K in the 20th century regarding preservat...
^
Line 3, column 187, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , this
...s and rules were implemented in the U.K.,this improves the system. Additionally, befo...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 602, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... of valuable artifacts because builders didnt bother to preserve them. Moreover, a...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 83, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...lves around inadequate financial support . The speaker points out that any archaeo...
^^
Line 5, column 230, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ernment. Initial examination of the site , any preserving methods all are paid by ...
^^
Line 7, column 206, Rule ID: DOUBLE_PUNCTUATION
Message: Two consecutive dots
Suggestion: .
...y have to examine the sites for approval.. Furthermore, If there is any archeologi...
^^
Line 7, column 454, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...at there were no adequate jobs for them thats why people are reluctant in persuing ar...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, so, then, third, thirdly, while, as to, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1749.0 1373.03311258 127% => OK
No of words: 327.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34862385321 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02595761229 2.5805825403 117% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 145.348785872 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56880733945 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 527.4 419.366225166 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.4275356972 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.45 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.35 21.698381199 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => 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: 0.0113676037726 0.272083759551 4% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00384795078482 0.0996497079465 4% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.00952842232769 0.0662205650399 14% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.00613301060593 0.162205337803 4% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00765736429957 0.0443174109184 17% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.45 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 63.6247240618 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.