Chaco Canyon in New Mexico
The reading and the lecture are both about Chaco Canyon in New Mexico which was enormous stone buildings. The author of the reading suggests that there are 3 theories presented what these buildings were used for, however the lecturer questions all these assumption. He is of the opinion that none of these is correct.
The first theory presented in reading passage is that these huge buildings, resemble to apartment buildings, were for residential purpose. This argument is challenged by the lecturer. He explains that although outside of the buildings are similar to apartment buildings, but the inside do not seem to be residential because if it were correct, it should be contain many fireplaces, but only 10 fireplaces were found.
In the second theory, the writer contends that these structures were made for supplying the grain maize. Thr speaker, however, rebuts this by mentioning that any maize grain did not find in these buildings after excavation.
Third assumption points out that these massive buildings had been used as ceremonial centers because numerous number of broken pots are found there. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that besides the broken pots other material were found like stone, sand, also construction tools. He states that maybe these material have remained from constraction operation as trash.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 249, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this assumption' or 'these assumptions'?
Suggestion: this assumption; these assumptions
...for, however the lecturer questions all these assumption. He is of the opinion that none of thes...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 358, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'contained'?
Suggestion: contained
...ecause if it were correct, it should be contain many fireplaces, but only 10 fireplaces...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d in these buildings after excavation. Third assumption points out that these m...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, third, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1136.0 1373.03311258 83% => OK
No of words: 214.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30841121495 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5961129796 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.635514018692 0.540411800872 118% => OK
syllable_count: 340.2 419.366225166 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => 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: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0655768315 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.272727273 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4545454545 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.36363636364 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0795459349212 0.272083759551 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0389608495463 0.0996497079465 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123205024141 0.0662205650399 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0542362455415 0.162205337803 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0939399328896 0.0443174109184 212% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.