Carved stone balls are a curious type of artifact found at a number of locations in Scotland. They date from the late Neolithic period, around 4,000 years ago. They are round in shape; they were carved from several types of stone; most are about 70 mm in diameter; and many are ornamented to some degree. Archaeologists do not agree about their purpose and meaning, but there are several theories. One theory is that the carved stone balls were weapons used in hunting or fighting. Some of the stone balls have been found with holes in them, and many have grooves on the surface. It is possible that a cord was strung through the holes or laid in the grooves around the ball. Holding the stone balls at the end of the cord would have allowed a person to swing it around or throw it. A second theory is that the carved stone balls were used as part of a primitive system of weights and measures. The fact that they are so nearly uniform in size – at 70 mm in diameter – suggests that the balls were interchangeable and represented some standard unit of measure. They could have been used as standard weights to measure quantities of grain or other food, or anything that needed to be measured by weight on a balance or scale for the purpose of trade. A third theory is that the carved stone balls served a social purpose as opposed to a practical or utilitarian one. This view is supported by the fact that many stone balls have elaborate designs. The elaborate carving suggests that the stones may have marked the important social status of their owners
The author states about the hypothesis of purposes that carved stone balls were made. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three hypotheses do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that those carved stone balls were weapons used for hunting and fighting. On the contrary, the professor cannot disagree more, reasoning that ancient weapons like arrows and hand weapons had a sign of wearing which there is not in these balls. Apart from that, the surface of them is not cracked or broken and seems very well preserved which they could not use as weapons.
The second argument the author gives is that they were used for weighing and measuring in a primitive system. However, the lecturer cannot be more outraged, explaining that they were made of different types of stones like sands or cord stones with various densities so that their weight would be different, similar to a handful of feather in comparison with a handful of rock. Therefore, their weight depends on materials that they are composed of; resulting into that they could not use as a measuring system.
Lastly, on one hand, the passage points out that they served a social purpose. Nevertheless, the professor declaring that they were not designed with intricate patterns. Actually, the signs on them are too simple to show someone's status. Additionally, in the past, a high ranking person usually buried with valuable properties but these stone balls were not found in tombs or graves.
Although the text suggests three hypotheses in supporting the purpose of making the carved balls, the lecturer believes that none of them are persuasive.
- topic 3
- Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect In your opinion, which of the following is the best thing to do?•Interrupt and correct the mistake right away.•Wait until the class or meeting 3
- Carved stone balls are a curious type of artifact found at a number of locations in Scotland. They date from the late Neolithic period, around 4,000 years ago. They are round in shape; they were carved from several types of stone; most are about 70 mm in 85
- Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long. 66
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The extended family grandparents, cousins, aunts, and uncles) is less important now than it was in the past. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, well, apart from, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1424.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 277.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14079422383 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52573455897 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.57761732852 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 423.9 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.4313222694 49.2860985944 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.538461538 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3076923077 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.69230769231 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.245764014567 0.272083759551 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0834285536283 0.0996497079465 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0571092167226 0.0662205650399 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11905430366 0.162205337803 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0460955091588 0.0443174109184 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27 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.