TPO-30
The reading and the lecture are both about the reasons of the story of the burning mirror that is just a myth. Greeks did not built these devices. The lecturer casts doubts on the main points made in the reading passage by providing there reasons.
First of all, according to the reading, the ancient Greeks were not technologically advanced to built a burning mirror. Because of the poor technology they were unable to design one. However, the lecturer dispute this point. He says that Greek mathematicians had such knowledge to create parabolic shapes, they knew the formula. So, this prove their capabilities to create one.
Secondly, the reading states that the burning mirror would have taken a long hour to set the boat on fire because the ships were made from wood. Therefor, take more hours to burn the ship. Nevertheless, the professor refutes this argument. He argue that Romans used different materials to built their ships one of them was peach, which can catch the fire in seconds. As a result, the ship would burn right away.
Lastly, the reading claims that flaming arrows were not an development that Greeks had in weapons. Because was common for them to use flaming arrows. They had no reason to build a weapon like flame arrow. On the other hand, the lecturer believes that people used the flame arrows all the time and it would had been not a surprise for them to see flamed arrows from a long distance while burning the ships.
In conclusion, the three main points made by the reading are effectively challenged by the lecturer.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-26 | Somayya | 80 | view |
| 2020-01-17 | Shiimaaa | 76 | view |
| 2020-01-09 | mashghanbar | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-25 | mahbod | 70 | view |
| 2019-10-06 | hanieh.azad | 70 | view |
- TPO 26 integrated writing task 85
- The author states about three reasons of ethanol that is not a good replacement for gasoline. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter- argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these reasons do not seem convincing.First and foremost, the writer mentions 75
- TPO 52-integrated writing task 3
- Endotherms are animals such as modern birds and mammals that keep their body temperatures constant For instance humans are endotherms and maintain an internal temperature of 37 C no matter whether the environment is warm or cold Because dinosaurs were rep 92
- TPO 49 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 127, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'build'
Suggestion: build
...ror that is just a myth. Greeks did not built these devices. The lecturer casts doubt...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 120, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” 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.
...lly advanced to built a burning mirror. Because of the poor technology they were unable...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 244, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'He' must be used with a third-person verb: 'argues'.
Suggestion: argues
...the professor refutes this argument. He argue that Romans used different materials to...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 57, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ing claims that flaming arrows were not an development that Greeks had in weapon...
^^
Line 6, column 71, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t flaming arrows were not an development that Greeks had in weapons. Because was...
^^
Line 6, column 91, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e not an development that Greeks had in weapons. Because was common for them to ...
^^
Line 6, column 309, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
... flame arrows all the time and it would had been not a surprise for them to see fla...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, while, in conclusion, 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 : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => 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: 1293.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 268.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82462686567 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04607285448 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40039665449 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563432835821 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 386.1 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.6888903018 49.2860985944 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 71.8333333333 110.228320801 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.8888888889 21.698381199 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.22222222222 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.391607750674 0.272083759551 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110575745332 0.0996497079465 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0908029491931 0.0662205650399 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172850803845 0.162205337803 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102744362672 0.0443174109184 232% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.7 13.3589403974 65% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 74.19 53.8541721854 138% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 11.0289183223 58% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.08 12.2367328918 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.45 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.