-
The passage glorifies the emperor Claudius of Rome and defends his rule against all the negative claims or ignorance attributed to him in many ancient historical texts. But the professor during his lecture refutes the optimistic claims asserted by the literature and provides various arguments to support his perspective.
According to the text the emperor Claudius of Rome was presented as the great Emporer, innovator, good-judge, kind-hearted, wise and compassionate ruler. But there had been various instances in the history which states otherwise.
To being with, Claudius was far from a good ruler. He had to pay a huge sum for the assassination of the Roman Empire, which is definitely not the quality of a good ruler. Moreover, some other ruler succeeding him followed the same path which eventually led to the Civil War.
Another aspect which glorifies him, claiming that he was a just and fair ruler. But the professor disagrees with the notion by giving various examples. He clarifies that Claudius was known for giving biased judgment. There were instances when he did not even hear both the parties in the conflict and took a decision. Another example to prove his injustice nature is that, since he had a soft corner for the slave- he took decisions in their favor even when they were corrupt.
There had been stories about this ruler that he loved violent games for the amusement of his people and himself, destroyed indigenous people. Clearly, these can be some qualities which are good attributes of a bad ruler.
Therefore, all the facts stated by the professor are not only in contradiction with the text provided by the literature but also, gives clear reasons why Claudius is considered as the bad ruler of Rome.-
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 4, Rule ID: BEING_BEGIN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'begin'?
Suggestion: begin
...e history which states otherwise. To being with, Claudius was far from a good rule...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, moreover, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1461.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 289.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0553633218 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67627319031 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56401384083 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 454.5 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.23620309051 12% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.2005530383 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.4 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2666666667 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.53333333333 7.06452816374 36% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.09492273731 147% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.