tpo30
The reading and the lecture are about "burning mirror" which was a creative weapon for the Greeks during fight with Roman ships. This device could concentrate the sun's radiation toward Roman ships and then these ships were catching fire. The reading provides three reasons that this had been a myth; however, the lecture casts doubt on the claims made in the article and the professor finds all arguments unconvincing.
First of all, the author of reading declares that the Greeks could not have such a sophisticated technology to create a wide mirror which could focus exactly on ships, even more there was not a large sheet copper in the ancient period for establishing such a large mirror. This point is challenging by the lecturer. She contends that the Greeks did not need to create a single sheet mirror. They could have applied small and individual copper sheets with exact parabolic curvature and then bend them to each other and their mathematicians may have assisted them in this way.
Secondly, the article states that an experiment has been shown that this weapon could have taken a long time to set the ships and start fire and in during this time, Roman ships had to be fixing without any movement; consequently, it is impossible that Roman ships had been steady for much time. This argument is rebutted by the professor. She believes that this experiment was conducted on the wood and it took time for ten minutes; however, the lecturer expresses that Roman ships were not created only with wood. She elaborates on this by mentioning that Roman ships had a thing which was called Pinch and it could catch fire in few second even if the ships were moving.
Finally, the reading passage proposes that the Greeks had other weapon like flaming arrows which may have done that same task; hence, the Greek's army did not require “burning mirror". On the other hand, the professor claims that Roman's soldiers knew the technology of flaming arrows and they could defend in front of them easily but this was a new technology. Roman's army was observing just a mirror and suddenly they were confronting a huge fire, so this approach was very effective for the Greeks.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 174, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'suns'' or 'sun's'?
Suggestion: suns'; sun's
...hips. This device could concentrate the suns radiation toward Roman ships and then t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1833.0 1373.03311258 134% => OK
No of words: 373.0 270.72406181 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91420911528 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39467950092 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48064766425 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 145.348785872 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506702412869 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 545.4 419.366225166 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 71.5006778903 49.2860985944 145% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.928571429 110.228320801 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6428571429 21.698381199 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.408421781445 0.272083759551 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.138390442306 0.0996497079465 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0848877746251 0.0662205650399 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.255195397279 0.162205337803 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0100577618729 0.0443174109184 23% => 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: 15.0 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.