The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment.
Talent is like a spark which proves itself by scintillating. The spark need not fade away to gain the attention. The real talent of a popular musician can be assessed without the musician being dead. The real talent does not require extra efforts to be noticed. Real talent is like an ornament embedded over the person which shines like the sun.
There have been various musicians in this world who achieved fame without interfering with honest assessment. For example, the world renowned musician Hridaynath Mangeshkar, the brother of great and well known Lata Mangeshkar, has beautified various poems and scripts by a mere touch. This real talent did not require much efforts to get noticed. The public upvoted him based on his talent alone.
There can be several political issues which can defame the musician or negate the musician. I agree to some extent on the point where it can interfere with honest assessment. It can reduce the popularity of the musician. But, the real talent is the only one which cannot stay in darkness for longer time. It is going to bloom as the time passes. As, the beclouded environment passes away, real talent shines like the sun once again.
I disagree with the claim made in first line. The real talent can be accurately assessed. They say beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. And music is a field which has many beholders. As, the music calms our ears with the tone and beats, it gets accurately assessed. The musician need not be dead for assessing his/her real talent. Sometimes, there can be unhealthy competition between the group of musicians but it cannot hold the real talent of the true musician for long.
The author makes the claim about the real talent of the popular musician. There have been many famous musicians like Dhinchak Pooja, who have had no real talent and have been discredited by the public. They have been defamed at a hgih rate. So, fame is a dynamic property which does not interfere with the real talent of the musician. As the real talent is acknowledged, the fame increases. Fame is highly dependant on the real talent.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 201, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...sessed without the musician being dead. The real talent does not require extra effo...
^^^
Line 3, column 319, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...touch. This real talent did not require much efforts to get noticed. The public upvo...
^^^^
Line 9, column 407, Rule ID: DEPENDENT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'dependent' on?
Suggestion: dependent
...ged, the fame increases. Fame is highly dependant on the real talent.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, so, well, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 58.6224719101 67% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1744.0 2235.4752809 78% => OK
No of words: 363.0 442.535393258 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.8044077135 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3649236973 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43096363539 2.79657885939 87% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 215.323595506 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.487603305785 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 704.065955056 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 13.0 4.99550561798 260% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.2370786517 138% => OK
Sentence length: 12.0 23.0359550562 52% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.4514354577 60.3974514979 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 62.2857142857 118.986275619 52% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 12.9642857143 23.4991977007 55% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 1.32142857143 5.21951772744 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 23.0 10.2758426966 224% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.518230201993 0.243740707755 213% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142391194637 0.0831039109588 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123483280899 0.0758088955206 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.29166488854 0.150359130593 194% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528701908796 0.0667264976115 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.7 14.1392134831 54% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.76 48.8420337079 139% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 12.1743820225 56% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 9.67 12.1639044944 79% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.19 8.38706741573 86% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 100.480337079 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 6.8 11.2143820225 61% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.7820224719 59% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.