Reading and lecture discusses whether the theory of an ingenious weapon named burning mirror used by Greek to cause fire on ship is true or false. Reading suggests that theory was myth, while professor thinks that explanation in reading is not cogent.
First, reading points out that ancient Greeks were not very intelligent to determine the method to focus sunlight on ship to cause fire. Furthermore, large copper sheets were not invented at that time to create this weapon. The professor casts doubt on the statement made in lecture. She says that large copper sheet might not be created from single sheet, but Greeks might have arranged dozens of small sheets to form parabolic shape to reflect sunlight. In addition, she also points out that Greeks were clever to perform fine task for creating huge copper sheet.
Second, reading argues that Roman ship must be steady for ten minutes in order to catch fire by burning mirror. However, professor challenges this point. She thinks that burning mirror can create fire in ship quickly due to a waterproof material called pinch glued on the surface of wooden ship. In addition, she brings out the fact that all these procedures can happen when ship is moving.
Thirdly, reading states there was no valid reason for Greeks to make burning mirror, because they were expert in shooting burning arrow to destroy enemies from far distance. In contrast, professor thinks that attacking soldiers can easily spot these burning arrows, so they are not effective weapons. Furthermore, professor adds that burning mirrors are invisible, thus they can set ship on fire without even noticing by anyone. Hence, professor successfully challenged statements made in reading.
- Integrated essay 3
- Parents involvement in child s education 89
- TPO-25 - Integrated Writing Task In 1938 an archaeologist in Iraq acquired a set of clay jars that had been excavated two years earlier by villagers constructing a railroad line. The vessel was about 2,200 years old. Each clay jay contained a copper cylin 85
- TPO-24 - Integrated Writing Task Animal fossils usually provide very little opportunity to study the actual animal tissues, because in fossils the animals' living tissues have been largely replaced by minerals. Thus, scientists were very excited recently 66
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?It is better to be safe than sorry. 90
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, second, so, third, thirdly, thus, while, in addition, in contrast
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 : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1440.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16129032258 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.35785636667 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602150537634 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 422.1 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.23620309051 12% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.4578874649 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.0 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.46666666667 7.06452816374 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.354856759597 0.272083759551 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115527031047 0.0996497079465 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0943379727348 0.0662205650399 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210817880687 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0224984463566 0.0443174109184 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => 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: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.