Tpo30
Both the reading and lecture discuss the feasibility of ingenious weapon, burning mirror, used by the Greeks to fire Roman's ships. While the author states that the story is a myth and on that time a device like it had not been invented, the lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article and believes that there are unconvincing.
First of all, the author claims that during that time, technology was not so advance to make such large mirrors. He believes the mirror should have been several meter width to focus the sunlight and set the ships on fire. The point is challenged by the lecture. She says that single sheets can form a large mirror which had able to set the Roman navy on fire.
the next point brought up is that it would take a long time to fire the ships by just a large mirror. However, the professor asserts that since the other materials like sticky substance which fire on just seconds had been used in Roman's ships, it is possible that mirrors set them on fire which had caused the entire ship to burn.
Finally, the writer mentions that such a weapon does not seem an improvement on the weapons that Greeks already had. The lecture, on the other hand, claims that the Greeks were familiar with fire arrows. She puts forth the idea that fire arrows could be observed easily. In order to surprise their enemies, they had used mirrors which were more effective.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 309, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... claims made in the article and believes that there are unconvincing. First ...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...believes that there are unconvincing. First of all, the author claims that du...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... able to set the Roman navy on fire. the next point brought up is that it wou...
^^
Line 5, column 3, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...ble to set the Roman navy on fire. the next point brought up is that it would ...
^^^
Line 7, column 150, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ady had. The lecture, on the other hand, claims that the Greeks were familiar wit...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, second, so, while, first of all, on the other hand
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 : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => 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: 1149.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 250.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.596 5.08290768461 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.12424104094 2.5805825403 82% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 348.3 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.6050035257 49.2860985944 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.75 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8333333333 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
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: 0.470177517344 0.272083759551 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.156088339681 0.0996497079465 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0878079863352 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2741043213 0.162205337803 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0460343368403 0.0443174109184 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 13.3589403974 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.4 12.2367328918 77% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.6 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 63.6247240618 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.