The article and the lecture both deal with a biography written by Chevalier de Seingalt. Whilst the author states that the memoir written by Chevalier is challenged by critics mentioning that he falsely put many events and gives three instances the lecturer opposes the author's claims. In his opinion, the writings are derived from the true experiences of Chevalier.
First, the writer claims that there is one event where Chevalier went to Switzerland and since he was wealthy he spent on gambling and parties. Furthermore, it is mentioned in the article that recent pieces of evidence do not match with the writings as he had to borrow a large sum of money from Swiss merchants. In contrast, the lecturer argues that it cannot be proved that he was poor by just the fact of the borrowed money. Additionally, the lecturer states that he had a good amount of assets and in order to encash them it took time. As a result, he ran out of cash and he had to ask for money.
Second, the author mentions that critics questioned the credibility of his conversations with Voltaire. On top of that, he adds that as it is not possible to present accurate information about their meeting since these were written after a long time had passed. However, the lecturer calls this argument into question by saying that Chevalier used to write his day-to-day conversations with Voltaire and maintain them. Further, he remarks that this can be proved by people who used to be with Chevalier stated that he had a habit to consult his notes before writing journals.
Finally, the writer asserts that critics questioned the escape of Chevalier from a jail. In addition, it is mentioned in the article that such escape was just written for readers to have a good time, and also the jailors are said to be bribed by contacts of Chevalier. As opposed to the author, the lecturer holds that if this was true then other prisoners in the jail had more powerful friends than Chevalier and would have escaped easily. He highlights that the Venice jail ceiling had to be repaired after the escape. So if he would have not escaped from that ceiling then there would have been no chance of repair.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 522, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[3]
Message: “So if” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ng had to be repaired after the escape. So if he would have not escaped from that cei...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, then, in addition, in contrast, as a result, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 47.0 22.412803532 210% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 30.3222958057 181% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1796.0 1373.03311258 131% => OK
No of words: 379.0 270.72406181 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.73878627968 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41224685777 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52297661303 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503957783641 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 548.1 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.4787953375 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.647058824 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2941176471 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194083556166 0.272083759551 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0669769655877 0.0996497079465 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.040594214944 0.0662205650399 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126622369511 0.162205337803 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0453413142263 0.0443174109184 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 53.8541721854 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 63.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.0 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.