TPO-08 - Integrated Writing Task
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 main idea of both the reading and lecture are about the accuracy of the long memoir of the Chevalier de seingalt, who lives between 1725 to 1798. The reading points out that there are some critics which cast doubt on the accuracy of the momoir; Furthermorem, the reading provide three reasons to illustrates this poin of view. On the contrary, the professor refutes this view by telling that all the memoir may have some mistake in every detail, but this memoir are accurate overall based on historical event.
First of all, the reading asserts that the Chevalier de seingalt in his memoir claim that he wa very wealthy and spent a lot of money on parties and gambling; on the contrary, he borrowed noticable amount of money from his friend. This shows that this memoir is not accurate. The lecturer, on the other hand, refuses the reading's claim by arguing that loaning money is not mean that he is poor; moreover, he spent a graet amount of money on gambling and lose his money. Furthermore, hehave a lot of asset and he want to sold this asset to get monet. Therefore, before receiving his money he needs to borrow money from this merchant.
Secondly, the author of reading averts that the conversation between the Chevalier de seingalt and the famous writer voltaire is not accurate because this memoir was written many year after the conversation occured, so he could not remember all the exact phrases from that conversation. The professor, by contrast, casts doubts on this issue and says that the Chevalier de seingalt each night after the conversation wrote down all the phrases which he could remember.
Eventully, the passage asserts that it is impossible that the Chevalier de seingalt scaped from prison using a piece of metal to make a hole in the ceiling. He had some well-connected friends that help him to scape from that prison. The lecture, on the contrary, refuses ths clam and adds that everyone in this prison has more friens and could scape and bibe in his case from prison. According to old document, ceiling had to be repired after scaping of the Chevalier de seingalt. Therefore, if the Chevalier de seingalt escaped with the hepls of his friend, why they should repair the seiling.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 72, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ng and lecture are about the accuracy of the long memoir of the Chevalier de sein...
^^
Line 3, column 491, Rule ID: A_LOT_OF_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun asset seems to be countable; consider using: 'a lot of assets'.
Suggestion: a lot of assets
...and lose his money. Furthermore, hehave a lot of asset and he want to sold this asset to get m...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 513, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'wants'.
Suggestion: wants
...rthermore, hehave a lot of asset and he want to sold this asset to get monet. Theref...
^^^^
Line 5, column 175, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun year seems to be countable; consider using: 'many years'.
Suggestion: many years
...ccurate because this memoir was written many year after the conversation occured, so he c...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 356, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...casts doubts on this issue and says that the Chevalier de seingalt each night aft...
^^
Line 7, column 58, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ssage asserts that it is impossible that the Chevalier de seingalt scaped from pr...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 22.412803532 192% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 30.3222958057 185% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1839.0 1373.03311258 134% => OK
No of words: 383.0 270.72406181 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.80156657963 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48955031688 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496083550914 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 553.5 419.366225166 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.4085868703 49.2860985944 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.6 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5333333333 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.73333333333 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.424262007605 0.272083759551 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.146426715241 0.0996497079465 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0740124629495 0.0662205650399 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.246694534566 0.162205337803 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0260982767107 0.0443174109184 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 63.02 53.8541721854 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.86 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.