Success achievers generally follow introspective ideas, knowledge and instinct. Strictures from negative minded people becomes usual while one runs for the lasting legacy. Ignoring denouncing comments, a person can achieve temporal success just by following his own instinct. But legendary pundits only able to imprint their name in boldface in the heart of people by accepting criticism to shape their journey towards the success.
Firstly, not all man are perfect, and nobody is master of everything. As the popular proverb says, "master of everything is master of none." By accepting the imperfections of oneself, a man can judiciously estimate the necessities and identify his way towards the success. In order to distinguish capabilities from deficiencies, one must be open to criticisms. While failure can be a base-mark for identifying the deficiencies, constructive criticism helps to follow the discrepancies properly.
Other than self-purgation, public denunciation is crucial to self-evaluation. Anybody can find a golden goose by fluke. You can run a marathon by yourself, you can beat your previous best timing several times. But unless you compare your timing with other marathon racers, you cannot know if your timing is best or not. Also excoriation in competitive environment acts as a great impetus for unlocking one's hidden power. Roger Federar, acclaimed tennis player, lost his 3rd win streak in grand slam to Rafael Nadal. It helped Federar to know his position in the world level tournament, how much lacking he had, and ultimately where he needed to focus for improvements.
Talking about self-improvement, which is a result of self-appraisal through opprobrium. After knowing the limitations, one can work on the definite problems hampering his performance. By cutting out the lacings holding back his performance, one can go further towards the road of the success. Enhancing the example of Roger Federar, after his loss to Nadal, all contemporary news media rebuked his performance mentioning his senescence. He came back with a win in Australian Open tournament and able to win 10 consecutive Grand Slam tournaments. Although too much slander in addition to failures can quench one's hunger for success. Throughout the history, legendary people were able learn to turn berating into impulse for their success.
It is now clear that, unique ideas can lead a man towards triumph; but cooperative ideas shaped by reproof can make a successful man to a legendary person. Not toned down by the harsh slander of nosy people, famous people use it as their impetus. Although disparaging and humiliating, public contempt is necessary for self-purgation, self-assessment and self-improvement. History teaches us with the example of legendary people whose names are still engraved in bold ink and also can be heard in popular lectures.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 321, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...not know if your timing is best or not. Also excoriation in competitive environment ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 608, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...nder in addition to failures can quench ones hunger for success. Throughout the hist...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, so, still, while, in addition, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 11.3162921348 35% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2431.0 2235.4752809 109% => OK
No of words: 446.0 442.535393258 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45067264574 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5955099915 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18708940267 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 215.323595506 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591928251121 0.4932671777 120% => OK
syllable_count: 749.7 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.4846462705 60.3974514979 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 93.5 118.986275619 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1538461538 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.88461538462 5.21951772744 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.107831831987 0.243740707755 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0295500340573 0.0831039109588 36% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0379517223427 0.0758088955206 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0587067303818 0.150359130593 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0322314444689 0.0667264976115 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.03 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.65 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 146.0 100.480337079 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.