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 reading passage says some reason about the carved stone balls which found around the scotland 4000 years ago. However, the lecture challenges that reasons.
The lecturer says that the reading's claim about the hunting and fighiting purpose of the balls is wrong. She says that other kind of historical weapons like arrows, are always damaged by the time and never they might be compeletly presarved. But the balls are not cracked and destroyed. But they are at a good situation.
The speaker also refutes the reading claim that this balls were used for weighting or measurement. According to the lecture, there have been some different kind of balls in that time, like sand balls or green balls. This different kind of balls had spacial density and they could not be the instrument of measurement because the same size balls might had different weight.
Finally, the lecture is not convienced that this stone balls were used for the social purpose and the person situation in the society. She claims that usually important persons in the past buried on their position while all the balls are found in the tunes or caves.
So the speaker says that the reading are not convinced her about carved stone balls.
- Essay topics: TPO-43 - Integrated Writing TaskAgnostids were a group of marine animals that became extinct about 450 million years ago. Agnostid fossils can be found in rocks in many areas around the world. From the fossil remains, we know that agnostids 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?The opinions of celebrities, such as famous entertainers and athletes, are more important to younger people than they are to older people.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
- A little over 2,200 years ago, the Roman navy attacked the Greek port city of Syracuse. According to some ancient historians, the Greeks defended themselves with an ingenious weapon called a "burning mirror": a polished copper surface curved to focus the 76
- Essay topics: TPO-45 - Integrated Writing TaskAny student of paleontology will be struck by the fact that a great many animals of the past were considerably larger than they are today. This holds true for species ranging from dinosaurs to most mammals. Ju 73
- Many scientists believe it would be possible to maintain a permanent human presence on Mars or the Moon. On the other hand, conditions on Venus are so extreme and inhospitable that maintaining a human presence there would be impossible.First, atmospheric 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, so, while, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1016.0 1373.03311258 74% => OK
No of words: 206.0 270.72406181 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.93203883495 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.78849575616 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.25081545952 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 145.348785872 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.543689320388 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 297.9 419.366225166 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.6188641297 49.2860985944 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.6666666667 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1666666667 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.25 7.06452816374 60% => 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 : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.212469432301 0.272083759551 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0829265043996 0.0996497079465 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0680949262907 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129290849347 0.162205337803 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0493932540832 0.0443174109184 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 13.3589403974 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 53.8541721854 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.78 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 63.6247240618 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.