tpo-25
In the reading, the author claims that e set of clay jars which had been excavated in 1936 and then were sold to an archaeologist could not have been used as electric batteries in that time by pointing out 3 reasons of support. However, finding all reasons questionable and implausible, the lecturer repudiate the claim and presents some evidence to the contrary.
At first, the author argues that clay jars should have a conductor such as a wire in order to be used. Because there were no any metal wires near them, they could not have been batteries. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that vessels had been found by villagers before archaeologists noticed them. Thus, local people who were not archaeologist might have found conductors attached the jars but they assumed these conductors were not important and throw them away.
In addition, the reading passage holds the view that the jars are identical to copper cylinders found in the Selecuia. Owing to the fact that copper cylinders were used for holding scrolls of sacred texts there, the clay jars might have been used in the same way. That being said, the lecturer disputes this reason by clarifying the fact that clay jars probably were used for holding scrolls in their origin but when an iron rod was attached them they must have been used to produce electricity. In ancient times, it was common to make something for one purpose and then use it for another one.
Finally, the author draws attention to lack of devices that relied on electricity in that time as the last point in supporting the claim. Yet again, the lecturer dismisses it by pointing out that the jars were used in several ways. For example, they could be used to shock people and so be presented as a magical power. Moreover, they could be used for healing people. Ancient doctors used electricity for this purpose.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-26 | supergirl20 | 40 | view |
| 2019-09-24 | mahan vahab kashi | 80 | view |
| 2019-09-19 | SeehtEntity | 61 | view |
| 2019-08-26 | negar.sh | 80 | view |
| 2019-05-20 | nahid77777777 | 78 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 122, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...in order to be used. Because there were no any metal wires near them, they could n...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, thus, for example, in addition, such as, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => 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: 1539.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 321.0 270.72406181 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.79439252336 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46334528468 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 145.348785872 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529595015576 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 473.4 419.366225166 113% => 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
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.1495286013 49.2860985944 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.6 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.13333333333 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.520218785888 0.272083759551 191% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.170281210966 0.0996497079465 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0969193112417 0.0662205650399 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.299055880552 0.162205337803 184% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0794125847801 0.0443174109184 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.88 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.