Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they respond to the
specific points made in the reading passage.
The article states that memoir written by Chevalier de Seingalt about his life is doubted by many of the critics and there are three reasons for it. However, the professor refutes all of those doubts by giving some reasons contrary to those doubts and proves memoirs' accuracy and reliability.
Firstly, the reading states that Chevalier spent money extravagantly in gambling and parties that critics believe that was possible due to borrowing money from others. However, the professor refutes this claim by stating that Chevalier sold his assets specifically his property. Therefore, in order for assets to be converted into money it requires some time and such time span enabled Chevalier to borrow money from someone else. Consequently, it does not show that he was poor.
Secondly, the reading posits that memoir containing the conservation between Chevalier and Voltaire is of questionable authenticity because it is not possible for anyone to remember the phrases used in conservation for long time. In contrast, the professor claims that when Chevalier came back to hotel each night after conservation with Voltaire, he used to recall and write all of those sentences spoke during conservation. This is justified by the people who used to be with Chevalier and noticed him writing those meeting sentences. Thus, declining the doubt on accuracy of that conservation.
Finally, the reading claims that according to critics, memoir stating event of Chevailers' escape from prison in Venice, Italy is doubtful because they think that it was not the trick of him to make hole in ceiling and climb through the roof but his friends in Venice who offered a bribe. Yet, the professor rejects this doubt and states that other people in the prison had better friends than Chevalier, therefore they could offer them bribe. Furthermore, the professor says that the ceiling of the prison was later repaired after the escape of Chevalier. Consequently, the reason for repair should be hole pierced by Chevalier.
In conclusion, the points made in lecture contrast with the reading. All the reasons from professors' lecture demonstrate that reasons stated in reading about doubtful authenticity of memoir are invalid.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-11-02 | Umesh Raja | 3 | view |
| 2015-01-21 | mari1 | 50 | view |
- Teachers should encourage their students to question everything. 70
- Pirouettes Ballet School is the clear choice for any child. Of all the dance schools in Elmtown, Pirouettes has the most intensive program, and our teachers have danced in the most prestigious ballet companies all over the world. Many of our students have 49
- Reading:In an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices, an international organizationstarted issuing certifications to wood companies that meet high ecological standards by conservingresources and recycling materials. Companies that 3
- A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal re 51
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they respond to thespecific points made in the reading passage. 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 602, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'holed'?
Suggestion: holed
...uently, the reason for repair should be hole pierced by Chevalier. In conclusion, t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, in conclusion, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 30.3222958057 175% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1857.0 1373.03311258 135% => OK
No of words: 353.0 270.72406181 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26062322946 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69823745401 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 145.348785872 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509915014164 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 567.9 419.366225166 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.724058316 49.2860985944 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.0625 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0625 21.698381199 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.8125 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.0712549188515 0.272083759551 26% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0286035344381 0.0996497079465 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0500484146306 0.0662205650399 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.046788584017 0.162205337803 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0474020607511 0.0443174109184 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => 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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.