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 Chevaliers 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 critics in the reading claim that Chavlier de Seingalt distorted or invented many events in the memoir to present his life glamorous and attractive which was not, based on the three reasons.However lecturer refutes all the claims and provide explainations for each refusal. The refusals are explained in the subsequent paragraphs.
Firstly, the reading claims that Chavleir while living in switzerland, borrowed sum of money from a Swiss merchant. So, as written in his memoir about the rich and wealthy life that he spent there is not correct. The lecturer opposes this by saying that he didn't borrow the money, instead he sold his property because he ran out of cash. This explains that Chavlier didn't give incorrect information about his wealthy life in memoir.
Secondly, the reading posits that since memoir was written many years after the conversations occured between Chavlier and Voltaire, how can Chavlier present the exact phrases of conversations they had a long time back. But, lecturer refutes this by saying that Chavlier wrote down each and every conversations they had. Also, the witnesses confirms this fact that he used to mainain the notes. So, it's inaccurate to believe that accuracy of conversations in memoir should be doubtful.
Thirdly, reading claims that Chavlier provided wrong information about the escape from the prison that he escaped by the help of making a hole in ceiling by a piece of metal and climbing through the roof. Critics doesn't believe this and says that he escaped by bribing prison officials with the help of his politically connected friends. However, lecturer opposes this by providing the information that there were many other prisoners in the prison who had more powerful political friends than Chavlier and couldn't escape. Also, government documents states that after his escape, ceiling had to be prepared. Basis this information, lecturer presents that the information in the memoir is correct.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 195, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...ich was not, based on the three reasons.However lecturer refutes all the claims and pro...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 195, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ich was not, based on the three reasons.However lecturer refutes all the claims and pro...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 258, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...lecturer opposes this by saying that he didnt borrow the money, instead he sold his p...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 367, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ut of cash. This explains that Chavlier didnt give incorrect information about his we...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 214, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... and climbing through the roof. Critics doesnt believe this and says that he escaped b...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 508, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...ful political friends than Chavlier and couldnt escape. Also, government documents stat...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 22.412803532 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1655.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 314.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27070063694 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67966143744 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535031847134 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 487.8 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.9540446202 49.2860985944 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.333333333 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9333333333 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.53333333333 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208340087543 0.272083759551 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.075423035965 0.0996497079465 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.068628069992 0.0662205650399 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136055874594 0.162205337803 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528137420453 0.0443174109184 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => 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: 13.29 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => 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.