Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage. The purpose and meaning of the stone balls
The reading and listening materials have a conflict of opinions about three theories about the purpose and meaning of the stone balls which were found at a number of locations in Scotland. In the reading, the writer refers to three theories. On the other hand, the lecturer in the listening believes that they are not convincing.
First of all, the reading passage explains that they could use as weapons in hunting or fighting. Because the end of its cord enabled people to swing it around or throw it. By contrast, according to the professor, she makes it clear that they were not suitable for this aim. Because they damaged and it was difficult for them to use as weapons.
Second, another theory that author discusses is that people used them as a tool for weighing and measuring of quantities of grain or other food. In contrast, the speaker disagrees with this point. She explains that they had different material like sand so that they have various densities. Therefore, they could not helpful for this goal.
As a final point, the author claims that the stone balls had a social purpose. The author refers to evidence like elaborate designs which they had so that they show the important social status of their owners. On the contrary, the lecturer in the listening passage casts doubt about this theory. She indicates that the famous people had different features which showed their prosperities. For example, when these people died, they were buried.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-04-22 | fireflower | 60 | view |
- the sea otter 73
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific theories presented in the reading passage. The invasion of the zebra mussel 80
- Young people today have no influence on the important decisions that determine the future of society as a whole. 70
- In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure successful future 43
- The Voynich manuscript 55
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, second, so, therefore, for example, in contrast, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => 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: 1226.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9435483871 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.39317828197 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.536290322581 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 358.2 419.366225166 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.3986177622 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 76.625 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5 21.698381199 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.168572172053 0.272083759551 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0547461363836 0.0996497079465 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0465424412772 0.0662205650399 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100929113115 0.162205337803 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0172621665115 0.0443174109184 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.6 13.3589403974 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 73.17 53.8541721854 136% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 11.0289183223 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.