a European silver coin discovered at Maine in the United States
The reading and lecture have contradictory opinion about a European silver coin discovered at Maine in the United States. The author of the extract strengthens the opinion of some archeologists that this coin don't have any to do as a historical evidence for the connection between Norse and Native Americans with three reasons. In the contrast, the professor of the lecture takes it as a genuine piece of historical evidence and denies each of the article's reasons.
First and foremost, according to the reading, far distance between Norse settlements, Canada, and Maine is a great justification to understand that the coin had not been brought by Norse. The professor in the lecture refutes this by referring to many other historical objects found at the same site of the coin. She gives a possible explanation to such a great distance: it is possible that people who traveled from Maine to Canada could bring coin back with themselves to their main place. It is not an unbelievable idea because the coin had a historical value for many individuals.
The professor in the lecture further asserts that if Norse had held more coins with themselves during their trip in Maine, they would have packed it in their things to get them back to Europe. This possible explanation rejects the writer implication of how there weren't any other coin at the site.
The text lasting insists that Norse knew about unusable of such a coin in America as money. Nevertheless, the professor in the lecture opposes this indication by asserting that Norse were likely to trade coins with Americans who were aware of precious objects such as silver coins. In addition, not only they were very attractive in the people's eyes, but also they could be used as jewelry.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-19 | Zmx_6 | 85 | view |
| 2023-06-29 | YasamanEsml | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-27 | Vivian Chang | 76 | view |
| 2023-02-16 | reza_fattahi | 80 | view |
| 2022-11-25 | nikki07hung | 85 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 210, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...on of some archeologists that this coin dont have any to do as a historical evidence...
^^^^
Line 5, column 264, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...cts the writer implication of how there werent any other coin at the site. The text...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, nevertheless, so, then, in addition, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1458.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 295.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94237288136 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68311883593 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518644067797 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3147639739 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.5 110.228320801 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5833333333 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.255611594815 0.272083759551 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100227334034 0.0996497079465 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.129796640763 0.0662205650399 196% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147107299887 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.069724665047 0.0443174109184 157% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.