the Chaco Canyon
The massive stone buildings in the Chaco Canyon is are some of the most famous structure in that area. The reading suggested several theories of what the buildings were for, but the lecture proves that they are all incorrect theories.
The first claim that the lecture made is that even though from the outside, the building looks like a normal Native American apartment, however, the inside didn’t show evidence that people had lived there. According to the lecture, there are not many fire places, however there are a lot of rooms. If the primary use of this building was for living, there would have been a lot more fire places.
The lecture then says that the second claim that the reading made, about it being used to store food, is also wrong. The lecture says that even though it seems logical for a giant empty house to store food, there are barely evidence of food being there. The research group there are no evidence of grain maize, which is the food the reading suggest was being stored, at all.
The lecture finally denies the reading’s final argument by saying that it is also not a ceremonial structure. The lecture says that the Pueblo Alto contains a lot of things beside broken pots, including things not expected on a ceremony. The mound there might just be a trash heap of construction material.
To sum it up, the reading’s three theory are all wrong and truth of the stone building are still to be revealed.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-07-18 | ayumiyazaki | 3 | view |
| 2022-07-05 | ishi_jais | 3 | view |
| 2022-02-12 | Mona malik | 80 | view |
| 2020-02-28 | aliyyevv | 3 | view |
| 2020-02-21 | zoi | 52 | view |
- Experts have been discussing whether a law restricting the importing buying and selling of nonnative species should be abolished 66
- Chaco Canyon 3
- Archaeologists have been wondering about the function of the shafts in the Great Pyramid which was built for an ancient Egyptian king The passage believes that the shafts are used for ventilation for religious reasons and as the passageways for the king s 75
- Pterosaurs 71
- Pterosaurs 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... that they are all incorrect theories. The first claim that the lecture made is th...
^^^
Line 3, column 254, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...re barely evidence of food being there. The research group there are no evidence of...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ding suggest was being stored, at all. The lecture finally denies the reading’s fi...
^^^
Line 4, column 110, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... it is also not a ceremonial structure. The lecture says that the Pueblo Alto conta...
^^^
Line 4, column 238, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ding things not expected on a ceremony. The mound there might just be a trash heap ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, look, second, so, still, then, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 10.4613686534 210% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1187.0 1373.03311258 86% => OK
No of words: 253.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.69169960474 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98822939669 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.23232344832 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565217391304 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 366.3 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.2653925368 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.9166666667 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0833333333 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.06452816374 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0552227105796 0.272083759551 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.027931311944 0.0996497079465 28% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0926376816206 0.0662205650399 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.040238935117 0.162205337803 25% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.080477870234 0.0443174109184 182% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 53.8541721854 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.92 12.2367328918 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.55 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 63.6247240618 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.