Summerise the points made by the lecture and explain how she disagrees with the author's points.
The lecturer and the author of the passage both discuss the Roman navy attack on the Greek port city of Syracuse. More specifically, they discuss the validity of the use of burning mirrors during this war. The author provides three points to undermine this historical theory; however, the lecturer challenges those ideas by providing an opposing perspective.
To begin with, the author argues that the ancient Greeks did not possess sufficient knowledge and technology to create single sheets, several meters wide, with specific parabolic curves, to set fire to enemy ships. On the contrary, the lecturer points out that these mirrors could be made of several smaller sheets. She also points out that the Greek mathematicians knew parabolic curves to form the specific curvature needed for the mirror to focus sunlight.
Next, the author claims that the burning mirror would have to be focused on a single point on the ships for a long time to start a fire, which would be unlikely with ships continually moving. He discusses an experiment in which it took 10 minutes for a wooden object to catch fire with burning mirrors to support his statement. The lecturer questions the author's assumption of burning wood with the mirrors. She explains that what the burning mirrors would set on fire was not the wood itself but the materials used in the gaps of the wooden panels to make the ship waterproof. She says that these materials would quickly and in second combust with burning mirrors, and the fire spreads onto the rest of the ship.
On the last note, the author states that the Greeks possessed another effective weapon, flaming arrows, for fighting approaching ships on the see, thus making the use of burning mirrors obsolete. Yet again, the lecturer argues that the Roman soldiers would be aware of flaming arrows and would be prepared to put the fire out. However, they could not see the rays of light from burning mirrors and would be caught off guard if suddenly their ships would catch fire, which would make the burning mirrors and effective weapon.
To conclude, the author illustrates three points to undermine the theory of Greeks using burning mirrors in the Roman invasion. At the same time, the lecturer presents counterpoints to the author's statement and their validity.
- Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoni 50
- The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only tools of human minds.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In d 50
- Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoni 50
- College students should be encouraged to pursue subjects that interest them rather than the courses that seem most likely to lead to jobs.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain y 66
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 356, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...s statement. The lecturer questions the authors assumption of burning wood with the mir...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 189, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... lecturer presents counterpoints to the authors statement and their validity.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, second, so, thus, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 30.3222958057 178% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1912.0 1373.03311258 139% => OK
No of words: 383.0 270.72406181 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99216710183 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42730267877 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496083550914 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 566.1 419.366225166 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.1765148283 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.5 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9375 21.698381199 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 7.06452816374 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218572821189 0.272083759551 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0880288665173 0.0996497079465 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0576449447834 0.0662205650399 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142701732831 0.162205337803 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623203323263 0.0443174109184 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 63.6247240618 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.