The reading passage mainly discusses the purposes of the Plains of Jars in Laos, and the author presents three theories. However, the professor in the listening casts doubt on all of them and tells us that these theories are not convincing.

First, the reading puts forward a viewpoint that the jars may serve the functionality of fermentation. In other words, they have been used to hold drinks to undergo the chemical change process. The woman professor in the listening, by contrast, points out the fact that containers used for fermentation are made of clay. This is because the process of making stone jars is time-consuming and expensive compared with making clay jars. Therefore, there is no reason for individuals in Laos to make stone jars for such purposes.

Another point of view expressed by the reading is that people can use stone jars to store water because it can be really hard for people in Laos to obtain water resources during the dry season. On contrary, the female professor thinks that while there are many jars near the ancient trade routes, there are rivers near the routes. These rivers could provide enough water resources for people to drink. In this case, traders can directly get fresh water from the river instead of using stone jars.

Eventually, the writer asserts that stone jars were the places where human remains were deposited. However, the lecturer maintains that it is unlikely. To prove her viewpoint, she says that if jars are tombs, they should have a cover to serve the protection function for the burial site. Since there are no covers on the site at all, it is unlikely that the existence of the stone jars can protect humans. Therefore, stone jars are not tombs.