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 reading states that the memoir of the Chevalier is not accurate, and provides three examples to prove that idea. The lecturer, however, finds the idea dubious and casts doubt on the reasons proposed by the reading passage.
The author argues that although Chevalier has claimed that he was wealthy in Switzerland, there are some evidence which shows us he borrowed money from merchant. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that the Chevalier grabed food and a lot of other things from people so he was prosperous, but gaining money took time, because he has to sell his achievments to earn money. As a result, during this time he borrowed money.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that, since the conversation between Chavelier and Voltaire has been written years after that conversation, critics believe that it is not accurate. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that although it has took years to be prepared, Chevalier wrote their conversation each night after that, so it is more reliable to contains the exact sentences conveied between them.
Finally, the reading asserts that due to having politicall well-conected friends, the Chevalier story aboout his escape from the prison is not acceptable. In cotrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that there were people has escaped who have more polically powerful ffriends that Chevalier. Moreover, there are some evidence on the old Venicesh government documents that shows prison ceiling has need some reparment on that time. This confirm the story of his escape.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...asons proposed by the reading passage. The author argues that although Chevalier h...
^^^
Line 3, column 269, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'taken'.
Suggestion: taken
...nderlines the fact that although it has took years to be prepared, Chevalier wrote t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, furthermore, however, moreover, so, well, as to, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1324.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 256.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.171875 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6252673785 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58203125 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 398.7 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.7516900415 49.2860985944 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.363636364 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2727272727 21.698381199 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.36363636364 7.06452816374 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.165568270524 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0604774373158 0.0996497079465 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0485742522998 0.0662205650399 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0846385966506 0.162205337803 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0364897584461 0.0443174109184 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.