Toward the end of his life, the Chevalier de Seingalt (1725−1798) wrote a long memoir recounting his
life and adventures. The Chevalier was a somewhat controversial figure, but since he met many famous
people, including kings and writers, his memoir has become a valuable historical source about European
society in the eighteenth century. However, some critics have raised doubts about the accuracy of the
memoir. They claim that the Chevalier distorted or invented many events in the memoir to make his life
seem more exciting and glamorous than it really was.
For example, in his memoir the Chevalier claims that while living in Switzerland, he was very wealthy, and
it is known that he spent a great deal of money there on parties and gambling. However, evidence has
recently surfaced that the Chevalier borrowed considerable sums of money from a Swiss merchant. Critics
thus argue that if the Chevalier had really been very rich, he would not have needed to borrow money.
Critics are also skeptical about the accuracy of the conversations that the Chevalier records in the memoir
between himself and the famous writer Voltaire. No one doubts that the Chevalier and Voltaire met and
conversed. However, critics complain that the memoir cannot possibly capture these conversations
accurately, because it was written many years after the conversations occurred. Critics point out that it is
impossible to remember exact phrases from extended conversations held many years earlier.
Critics have also questioned the memoir’s account of the Chevalier’s escape from a notorious prison in
Venice, Italy. He claims to have escaped the Venetian prison by using a piece of metal to make a hole
in the ceiling and climbing through the roof. Critics claim that while such a daring escape makes for
enjoyable reading, it is more likely that the Chevalier’s jailers were bribed to free him. They point out that
the Chevalier had a number of politically well-connected friends in Venice who could have offered a bribe.
The articles state the controversies surrounding the authenticity of Chevalier de Seingalt’s memoir & provides three reasons to support them. However, the professor explains that the memoir is pretty accurate and all pieces of information are from reliable sources.
First, the reading claims that Chevalier was not wealthy, and provides an example where he borrowed money. The professor refutes this point by saying that borrowing money does not imply that Chevalier was not wealthy. She states that as Chevalier spent a great amount of money on parties and gambling. So he always doesn’t have cash with him and as it takes time to convert assets to cash, Chevalier needs to borrow the money.
Second, the articles posit that critics are skeptical about the accuracy of the conversation between Chevalier & Voltaire, as it is impossible to remember the exact phases of the conversation. However, the professor says that every night Chevalier used to write down all the conversation he had. She also states that while writing the memoir the information from the written journal were used.
Third, the reading states that Chevalier had a number of politically well-connected friends and they helped him to bribe and get out of the prison. The professor opposes this by stating that there were other prisoners in there too with much more power than Chevalier, but they weren’t able to bribe and escape. She also asserts that from the government documents it can be manifested that just after Chevalier escaped there was repair ordered for the ceiling. This validates the fact that he escaped through the ceiling as mentioned in the memoir.
Thus, the professor refutes all the controversies mentioned in the article and validates all the facts mentioned in the memoir, citing a possible reason.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 336, Rule ID: FROM_FORM[3]
Message: Did you mean 'form'?
Suggestion: form
...to bribe and escape. He also states the from the government documents it can be mani...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, then, third, thus, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1525.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25862068966 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80009474614 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551724137931 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 461.7 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.1029396865 49.2860985944 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.928571429 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7142857143 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.21428571429 7.06452816374 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
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: 0.192818224794 0.272083759551 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0750371450776 0.0996497079465 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0391488168792 0.0662205650399 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110932472555 0.162205337803 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.034553321378 0.0443174109184 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => 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.