In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution
without first being strongly influenced by past achievements in that field.
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
developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the
statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations
shape your position.
The only possible way to make a crucial contribution in any field of endeavor is to have some past influence in any field or past discovery. The prompt states that it is only possible to make a significant contribution in any field if we have past history of success or achievement. In my opinion, I strongly agree with the above statement and argue that one needs to have some past influence in the field to make a significant contribution in any endeavor in three paragraphs.
Firstly, most of the modern developments in the world are the outcome or advancement of older ideas or achievement: in fact, almost all new inventions are the result of slight modifications of past discoveries. Nikola Tesla and Thomas Alva Edison, for instance, had developed the principle of electricity years ago, and the advancement and additional research on that field lead to electrification. Were it not for Edison or tesla's invention of electricity, we would be in a darker world or there would be another scientist for that purpose.
Secondly, the influence or contribution in the past determines future of the any personality or organization. In other words, if someone has done laudable work in the past, then s/he can have good potential for another great contribution in the future. For example, the former prime minister of Nepal, KP Sharma Oli, has done lots of praiseworthy developments for the sake of the nation and he has got the trust of the citizen, which leads him to triumph in the election and that helped even more for him to do another great contribution for the country. Had not it be the influential task by Oli in the past, he would not have a significant contribution to the nation.
Finally, every modern thing is the influence of past discoveries. Most of us have sophisticated wall tv in our homes. However, all those are the advancement of past discoveries. The fundamental is the same for LCD TVs and bulky flat TVs: the only difference is the shape and the quality of the picture. It is, therefore, past discoveries and influential works are the basis for future development, and the future depends on the past.
In conclusion, some people may disagree with the above statement and may argue that, if the significant contribution can only be made by those who have done astounding past achievements in the field then how can freshers or immature youths can prosper in that field. However, they are unaware of the fact that those freshers may have done some fascinating activities or, say, projects in their academia, that can help them to make a great contribution to the country. Thus, one must have past achievements or influence to make a significant contribution to the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 567, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...ontribution for the country. Had not it be the influential task by Oli in the past...
^^
Line 10, column 85, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the above statement and may argue that, if the significant contribution can only...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, in my opinion, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 12.9106741573 225% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2251.0 2235.4752809 101% => OK
No of words: 460.0 442.535393258 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89347826087 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02066840586 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.447826086957 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 724.5 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.8415606673 60.3974514979 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.055555556 118.986275619 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5555555556 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.61111111111 5.21951772744 184% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.283278088006 0.243740707755 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101392425388 0.0831039109588 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0963867882573 0.0758088955206 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156632528839 0.150359130593 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.113860071932 0.0667264976115 171% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.