Ways to lift heavy rocks to build an Egyptian pyramid
In this set of materials, the writer postulates the ways to lift heavy rocks while constructing the pyramids in Eqypt and provides three probable theories to endorse its idea. However, the professor in the listening completely refutes the points by showing their inaccuracy and gainsays each of the hypotheses mentioned in the reading.
First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting the first possible hypothesis by stating the various kinds of ramps constructed around the pyramids to carry materials. All types of ramps were inclined which helped in reducing time and labor. On the other hand, the speaker explains that ramps could not have been used for pyramid construction. Straight ramps would have adjusted to exact same position as that of the construction base again and again, and spiraling and zigzagging ramps also have other issues: safety issues and difficulty in changing the direction of rocks. Thus, this method could not have been used to lift heavy objects.
Secondly, the professor further points in detail that there is no archeological proof that spiraling ramps were utilized to transport materials inside the Egyptian buildings since not only the 3D computer results are valid but also is not allowed to dig the structure of pyramids at all. Therefore, those ramps would not have existed. These claims refute the second theory mentioned in the reading about the findings of a French architect. He proposed that spiraling ramps were used to carry rocks.
Ultimately, the article wraps its argument by declaring the third theory of limestone concrete. It claims that Egyptian people used limestone and concrete to build and gather blocks of pyramids with the help of tools and wooden molds. On the other hand, the professor refutes this theory by showing the inaccuracy of the author that this method is impossible to use back 20 years ago.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-01-28 | Safa Arshad | 80 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thus, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1574.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 304.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17763157895 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56378970652 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5625 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 478.8 419.366225166 114% => 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: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.6573632964 49.2860985944 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.428571429 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7142857143 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.21428571429 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176416456109 0.272083759551 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0539287250912 0.0996497079465 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0779058183156 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106098718616 0.162205337803 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0496396984931 0.0443174109184 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.