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 passage asserts the Chevalier memoir is questionable. It provides three supporting ideas. The lecturer states that the biography of Chevalier was right. She refutes each of the reading reason.
First, the reading states Chevalier was not a wealthy person as he borrowed money from the Swiss bank. The professor denies this claims. She says, Chevalier was rich and wealthy person. It is true he had lended money from the bank. It was not due to his impoverish reason rather it was for others. That was, when he was selling his property it took time to get the money.
Second, the passage was skeptical about the authenticity of Chevalier conversation with Voltaire. But, the lecturer refutes such skepticism. She presents, Chevalier was writing every night after met with Voltaire but he put that material unpublished. After many years he published those authentic and exact conversation.
Third, the reading questioned about the Chevalier escape from the Venice prison. The point is quite problematic with the lecturer. She asserts Chevalier was banging the ceiling of the jail and it was supported by the Venice document. According to the archives, the prison ceiling was need to repair after banging had happened. There was no trace of bribery and the presence of Chevalier political alliances were not found.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-28 | TANVIR SIDDIKE MOIN | 76 | view |
| 2023-10-04 | 200suranjan | 60 | view |
| 2022-12-10 | Naveena0 | 73 | view |
| 2022-11-07 | anman | 80 | view |
| 2022-11-07 | anman | 80 | view |
- In the United States it had been common practice since the late 1960s not to suppress natural forest fires The let it burn policy assumed that forest fire would burn themselves out quickly without causing much damage However in the summer of 1988 forest f 75
- 61
- Some people believe that competition for high grades motivates students to excel in the classroom Others believe that such competition seriously limits the quality of real learning 50
- It is more harmful to compromise one's own beliefs than to adhere to them. 75
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement For the successful development of a country it is more important for a government to spend money on the education of very young children five to ten years old than to spend money on universities Use sp 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, second, so, then, third, as for, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 12.0772626932 33% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1113.0 1373.03311258 81% => OK
No of words: 214.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20093457944 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64669613608 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.565420560748 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 332.1 419.366225166 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 11.0 21.2450331126 52% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 24.7043459566 49.2860985944 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 58.5789473684 110.228320801 53% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 11.2631578947 21.698381199 52% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 2.89473684211 7.06452816374 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213741489547 0.272083759551 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0661982421285 0.0996497079465 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0523591937392 0.0662205650399 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13093115889 0.162205337803 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0281669050472 0.0443174109184 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.7 13.3589403974 65% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.31 53.8541721854 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.7 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 4.0 10.7273730684 37% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 6.4 10.498013245 61% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.