TPO-30 - Integrated Writing Task 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 co

The article doubts on the credibility of the Roman navy attackek the Syracuse by a "burning mirror". However, the speaker casts doubt on the statement. She uses relevent proof to illustrate the possibility of the Syracuse attack.

To begin with, the Roman craftsman had the ability to build a giant copper mirror. Instead of making this mirror from one single piece of material, the Romans may built it from small pieces of copper. Moreover, this technique enabled the Romans to make the mirror into a parabolic curvature.

Second, it took shorter time to set the ships on fire than the article inffered. The Greec ships are not only made by woods, but also by pitches. While firing wooden object 30 meters away need ten minutes, it only took seconds to set fire on pitch. In that case, Roman soldiors could set the ships on fire by relatively short time.

Third, enemies would know how to defence the flaming arrows. But they did not know the tricks of the "burning mirror". While the formor had been used broadly in Roman battles, the later was a newly invented weapon. At that time, Greec had no idea how to defence this burning mirror.

All in all, as the professor illustrate the mechanism of making the mirror and enlight the ship, as well as the advantage of using mirrors, she eventually refuses to accept the statement.

Votes
Average: 8.1 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 82, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...the Roman navy attackek the Syracuse by a 'burning mirror'. However, th...
^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, may, moreover, second, so, third, well, while, as well as, to begin with

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 12.0772626932 17% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1129.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 232.0 270.72406181 86% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86637931034 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53210288805 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594827586207 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 350.1 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.9492653367 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.2666666667 110.228320801 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.4666666667 21.698381199 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.13333333333 7.06452816374 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less 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: 0.357470302597 0.272083759551 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110066841081 0.0996497079465 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0543112255018 0.0662205650399 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163624731146 0.162205337803 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0633652140152 0.0443174109184 143% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.2 13.3589403974 69% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.67 12.2367328918 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 63.6247240618 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.