All too often, inventors from the U.S. and European countries are incorrectly credited for creating the modern world. In fact, various nations around the world are truly responsible for many of the innovations that have shaped our lives today.
To give one example, European armies are credited with developing the modern firearm in the 19th and early 20th centuries. It is true that the European guns were hand-held combustion weapons that could quickly fire a bullet, just like today’s handguns. However, it is also true that 600 years earlier, Chinese armies had already been using firearms called “hand cannons,” which had many of the essential features of the European weapons that came later.
Then there is the case of the airplane. The world remembers American inventors Wilbur and Orville Wright for creating modern flight, with their development of a steerable, motorized flying machine in 1903. Yet Brazilian aviator Alberto Santos-Dumont had made the world’s first true steerable motorized flying machine in 1899. It is further worth noting that the Wright Brothers’ first flights in 1903 and 1904 lasted less than 5 minutes, while Santos-Dumont’s 1899 flight lasted nearly a half hour.
But perhaps the most popular modern invention that historians wrongly thank Europe for is the camera, a device nearly everyone owns and uses today. Most history books name 19th century French photographer Louis Daguerre as the inventor of the camera. In fact, the true inventor of the camera was an Iraqi scientist born nearly 1,000 years before Daguerre. Ibn al-Haytham developed pinhole camera technology, the basis for modern photography, in the early 11th century. This is yet another prominent example of Western inventors dominating our historical awareness, so that we fail to notice how much the rest of the world has contributed to modern life.
Summarize the points made in the lecture you just heard, explaining how they challenge points made in the reading.
Although, both lecture and reading agree that U.S. and European countries were given way too much credit for all the innovation and creativity that shaped the world, lecturer counter attacks all three examples presented by the reading in support of the argument, claiming that the reading's instances are weak.
Firstly, the lecturer puts light on the discovery of camera, which the reading claims to be actually invented by the Iraqi scientist. She adds up to her criticism by saying that even though the Iraqi scientist, al-Haytham, developed the pin hole camera technology way before the European photographer, Louis Daguerre, that pin hole technology never enabled anyone to take the actual photographs or print them. It was only the Loius Daguerre's camera that allowed the mentioned features first in the history.
Furthermore, the airplane example, which was allegedly invented by the Brazilian aviator, Alberto Santos-Dumont, in the reading is also condemned by the lecturer by the fact that Alberto never invented the airplane, but a hydroden balloon which was not safe or practical. She posits that the actual inventors of the airplane were indeed the Wright brothers.
Third, for the example of hand guns stated in the reading, which it claims to have first invented by the Chinese, the lecturer once again denies the statement by adding that the Chinese hand cannons were too heavy and needed to be carried by two people. On the other hand, European guns were much more sophisticated and served the actual purpose. Hence, it was right to discern the inventors of hand guns as Europeans.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, so, third, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1346.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 260.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17692307692 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61912628279 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565384615385 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 410.4 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.23620309051 36% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 92.5292079345 49.2860985944 188% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.555555556 110.228320801 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.8888888889 21.698381199 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.44444444444 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114144803874 0.272083759551 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0411851605001 0.0996497079465 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0557519741258 0.0662205650399 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.07313874074 0.162205337803 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0705529711808 0.0443174109184 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 13.3589403974 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 53.8541721854 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.36 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 10.7273730684 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.