Result Method used: LIX (Swedish). LIX value: 66. A low LIX value indicates better readability. According to the father of LIX, a text with a value of 20 isMessage 1 of 4 , Oct 2, 2010View Source
Method used: LIX (Swedish).
LIX value: 66.
A low LIX value indicates better readability. According to the father of LIX, a text with a value of 20 is very easy to read. A value of 50 is a difficult text. Typical legalese has a LIX value of 50 and above. Childrens litterature has a typical LIX value of 27.--- In email@example.com, "val2160" <wdenval@...> wrote:
> Hmmm, never actually seen a negative score before so maybe another index
> will yield a better result:
> Indication of the number of years of formal education that a person
> requires in order to easily understand the text on the first
> readingGunning Fog index :22.00
> Approximate representation of the U.S. grade level needed to comprehend
> the text : Coleman Liau index :15.32Flesh Kincaid Grade level :20.31ARI
> (Automated Readability Index) :21.64SMOG :17.49
> Benefit from IT <http://www.benefit-from-it.com/> provides the
> following typical Fog Index scores:
> Typical Fog Index ScoresFog IndexResources6TV guides, The Bible, Mark
> Twain8Reader's Digest8 - 10Most popular novels10Time, Newsweek11Wall
> Street Journal14The Times, The Guardian15 - 20Academic papersOver 20Only
> government sites can get away with this, because you can't ignore
> them.Over 30The government is covering something up
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "val2160" wdenval@
> > --- In email@example.com, "ted.wrinch"
> > ted.wrinch@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I've just posted the below as what I hope is my last communication
> > with the hole. I don't know If I've achieved much and I haven't 'won'
> > anything, as that's impossible since logic itself shrivels up and dies
> > in that place of despair.
> > >
> > > "It's been an interesting exchange that we've had over Steiner,
> > Ostwald and materialism over the past year. You've demonstrated that
> > don't understand primary qualities (for instance that they are
> > measurable) and cannot therefore have any understanding of their
> > significance for the development and success of Western science over
> > last four hundred years (an interesting situation for someone who
> > to teach history of science at an Ivy League institution). In our
> > discussion of 'materialism' you have failed to provide a single
> > definition of what you understand by 'matter' and have instead spent
> > time attacking the three standard philosophical definitions that I
> > provided and that I demonstrated matched the understanding of Ostwald
> > and Steiner. This indicates that you do not understand what
> > is (an interesting situation for someone who claims to teach
> > at the same institution). In spite of this failure on your part you
> > continued to argue that I don't understand materialism, that I use the
> > term vaguely, too sweepingly and in some specialised,
> > manner. To bolster the weakness of your position you have not scrupled
> > to the use of the full range of logical fallacies, the making of false
> > assertions and imputations, as well as invidious appeals to emotion.
> > None of the above is what one would expect from a 'scholar' and
> > 'historian' such as you claim yourself to be; it is rather what one
> > would expect of a charlatan or what others have termed an
> > >
> > > Yours for truth,
> > >
> > > T.
> > >
> > > Ted Wrinch"
> > "For example, you sometimes seem to believe that materialism is the
> > samething as naïve realism, just as Ted sometimes seems to believe
> > that materialismis the same thing as quantification and
> > and measurability."
> > Readability index calculator
> > Paste your sample text in the field below. A longer text provides a
> > accurate measurement. Select measurement method and click 'calculate
> > score' to see the score for your text. The result is displayed below
> > form.
> > Do you have a readability formula for a different language? Pleasepost
> > an article comment
> > and I'll add it here.
> > * Text:Method: Flesch-Kincaid (English) LIX (Swedish,
> > Danish) Fernandez-Huerta (Spanish) Douma (Dutch)
> > Kandel & Moles (French) Result
> > Method used: Flesch-Kincaid (English).
> > Flesch-Kincaid Grade level: 23.
> > Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease score: -5.
> > The Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesch-Kincaid> score indicates how
> > a text is to read. A high score implies an easy text. In comparison
> > comics typically score around 90 while legalese can get a score below
> > 10.
> > The Flesch-Kincaid Grade level indicates the grade a person will have
> > have reached to be able to understand the text. E.g. a grade level of
> > means that a seventh grader will be able to understand the text.
> > http://www.standards-schmandards.com/exhibits/rix/index.php
> > <http://www.standards-schmandards.com/exhibits/rix/index.php>