The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment.
Some people are of the opinion that the genuine aptitude of a musician is only kenned after he or she has been dead for many generations. However, I vigorously disaccord with this verbalization and believe that one shouldn't wait generations after the musician is dead to assess them for the following two reason.
Firstly, if assessing veridical aptitude of a person betokened that he or she should be dead for several generations then there wouldn't be so many popular musicians who are in the good books of many reprehenders. For example, let's optically canvass the case of Michael Jackson. He was termed the 'King of Pop' even afore he reached the cessation of his vocation. What this denoted was people kenned his veridical aptitude without waiting for several generations for him to pass away. If the above prompt were veridical then this designation given to him and the awards he won would all just be to please him or his fans, which is most definitely not the case.
Secondly, a discerning upbraider is one who is equitable and reviews the aptitude of a person without being guided by his or her fame. If authentic aptitude of musicians were kenned only years after they pass then that would betoken that the performers are being alimented whole lot of prevarications throughout their vocation and that all the awards they have won would ineluctably amount to nothing, which would only accommodate to exasperate their fans and family for generations to come as their favorite artists were not given the apperception they deserve albeit they were popular during their time.
Some people may argue that a musician's work needs to stand the test of time in order to plenarily be given a fair shot. However this erroneous and a musician can be correctly assessed albeit he or she is still. Hence, people need not wait a hundred years in order to plenarily ken the veridical potential of an artist.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-03 | Gbangbala Usman | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-28 | Gnyana | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | Jbrachael | 66 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | Ataraxia-m | 62 | view |
| 2023-08-05 | Ataraxia-m | 50 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In 50
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment 50
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment 80
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and supporting you 62
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 216, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...this verbalization and believe that one shouldnt wait generations after the musician is ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 129, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...dead for several generations then there wouldnt be so many popular musicians who are in...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 274, Rule ID: WHOLE_LOT[1]
Message: Use simply 'lot'.
Suggestion: lot
...that the performers are being alimented whole lot of prevarications throughout their voca...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 121, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...rder to plenarily be given a fair shot. However this erroneous and a musician can be co...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 58.6224719101 60% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1583.0 2235.4752809 71% => OK
No of words: 325.0 442.535393258 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87076923077 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24591054749 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65737157143 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 215.323595506 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513846153846 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 704.065955056 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 20.2370786517 59% => 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: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 102.718060729 60.3974514979 170% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.916666667 118.986275619 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0833333333 23.4991977007 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.25 5.21951772744 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.269165706429 0.243740707755 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104440095482 0.0831039109588 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0775753219036 0.0758088955206 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16668774599 0.150359130593 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0568168154144 0.0667264976115 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.1392134831 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 100.480337079 63% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.