Although the author states three main hypotheses to support the idea about the origin of strange sounds, called quackers, in submarines of North Atlantic and Arctic Ocean in the time period of 1960s to 1980s, the professor finds them dubious and brings up three counter reasons to refute them all.
First, the author argues that these odd sounds were noise of a countership ritual between male and female of orca whales. However, the professor holds the view that this idea seemed convincing at first glance but most of these whales lived near surface of the ocean which their sounds were detectable by sonar, whereas this sounds came from deep submarine and were undetectable.
Second, the reading takes the view that these sounds were produced by giant squid, the marine invertebrates living in Deep Ocean. On the other hand, the professor asserts that these sounds were present for just two decades, from 1960s to 1980s. Whereas the presence of these giant squid were permanent. How could it was possible that their sounds were just heard for two decades while they lived there continuously.
Third, the reading claims that military technology of another country were secretly placed in submarine and these sounds were emitted from them. The professor, however, believes that as the voices were moving around swiftly, the military technology was unlikely to be portable and change position. In addition, they did designed to make noise to be detectable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 246, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... just two decades, from 1960s to 1980s. Whereas the presence of these giant squid were ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 321, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'design'
Suggestion: design
... change position. In addition, they did designed to make noise to be detectable.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, third, whereas, while, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1230.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 238.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16806722689 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92775363542 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.35429132932 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59243697479 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 364.5 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.7917577752 49.2860985944 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.0 110.228320801 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8 21.698381199 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06452816374 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.44057707373 0.272083759551 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.176052700874 0.0996497079465 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0653639134471 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.251871730811 0.162205337803 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0778830286357 0.0443174109184 176% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.3589403974 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.