Both the reading and the lecture discuss the historical veracity of the memoirs of Chevalier de Seingalt, who met uncountable personalities throughout his life, so historians see great value in his work. However, the reading suggests that Sengalt altered many of the historical events in order to seem more interesting. Nonetheless, the lecturer defends the veracity of the memoirs and cast doubt on the claims made by the passage.
First, the author of the passage establishes that Seingalt claimed he was very wealthy, but it is known that he borrowed a lot of money from a merchant in Switzerland, so it does not make sense that he had to do this if he was rich. The professor in the lecture points out that being wealthy does not mean that he had a lot of cash, but in turn, he had many properties and needed some time to sell them and transform them into money.
Second, in the memoirs, he wrote a lot of conversations that he had with the writer Voltaire, but the passage claims that is not possible that he could remember them accurately until the time he wrote his book. The lecturer rebuts this argument. He presents the fact that Seingalt wrote down as much as he could of the conversations he had in his life. Furthermore, many people close to Seingalt saw him consulting his notes when writing his work.
Finally, in one chapter of his book, he tells how he managed to escape prison by making a hole in the ceiling of his cell. But the article states that is far more likely that he used his powerful connections to bribe the jailors. Nevertheless, the lecturer challenges this argument. He posits that there were prisoners with connections far more powerful in said prison, but they were not able to get out, so why think that Seingalt could?. Moreover, prison reports say that his cell's ceiling had to be repaired after Seingalt scaped, thus proving his statement.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, so, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 53.0 22.412803532 236% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => 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: 1560.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 330.0 270.72406181 122% => OK
Chars per words: 4.72727272727 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6280677557 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527272727273 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 471.6 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3597668854 49.2860985944 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.428571429 110.228320801 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5714285714 21.698381199 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.14285714286 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.357324746497 0.272083759551 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118694015097 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0648958435694 0.0662205650399 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210901955083 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0107817704853 0.0443174109184 24% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 53.8541721854 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.45 12.2367328918 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 10.7273730684 140% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.