tpo30
The reading passage contends that the story of the burning mirror is improper for three reasons. However, the professor in the lecture regards this view as an unconvincing one, using three specific points to support her idea.
To begin with, the professor argues that the burning mirror could be fabricated by using dozens of small pieces, instead of manufacturing a
very precise parabolic, as the writer mentions in the reading passage. Dozens of small pieces can achieve the goal of setting ships on fire as well without a large sheet of copper, which was not available in ancient Greeks when technology was not advanced enough.
Secondly, in spite of the claim in the reading passage that the burning mirror would have taken a long time to set the ships on fire, the professor refutes it by the possibility that there were other materials on the ship, which were extremely flammable such as waterproof materials. In the experiment carried out in the article, it was wrongly presumed that a burning mirror was used to set the wood on fire.
Last but not least, according to the reading passage, flaming arrows
are more convenient to burn the enemy compared to the burning mirror. This is directly contradicted by the professor, as she points out that since Roman soldiers were familiar with the flaming arrows, the burning mirror was a more effective and surprising weapon during this period, for it can set the ships on fire without realization.
In conclusion, the professor confutes all the reasons mentioned in the reading passage.
- Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommend 69
- tpo30 76
- Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove C 54
- Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and supporting your position you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these c 28
- Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these 16
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 140, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...small pieces, instead of manufacturing a very precise parabolic, as the writer me...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Very
...l pieces, instead of manufacturing a very precise parabolic, as the writer mentio...
^^^^
Line 15, column 69, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...g to the reading passage, flaming arrows are more convenient to burn the enemy c...
^^^^
Line 17, column 2, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Are
...the reading passage, flaming arrows are more convenient to burn the enemy compa...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, second, secondly, so, well, in conclusion, such as, in spite of, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1306.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 258.0 270.72406181 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06201550388 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58141862783 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550387596899 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 394.2 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
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: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 67.7048788293 49.2860985944 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.111111111 110.228320801 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.6666666667 21.698381199 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6666666667 7.06452816374 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 4.09492273731 171% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.398858201425 0.272083759551 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.156205707773 0.0996497079465 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0825858869126 0.0662205650399 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158157943013 0.162205337803 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108081168068 0.0443174109184 244% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.3589403974 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.66 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.