The reading article talks about doubts critics had regarding the accuracy of events presented in Chevalier de Seingalt's memoir. The lecture dismisses all the doubts raised in the reading and present arguments in support of the reliability of memoir.
First, the reading passage questions the authenticity of Chevalier was rich and wealthy person in Switzerland. On the other hand, he was known to love gambling and partying. Chevalier borrowed money from Swiss merchants. But, the lecture argues that, even if Chevalier took loan that does not prove he was poor. To spent considerable amount on gambling and partying, he must have had good assets to sell. Meanwhile, the properties were liquidating, he might have borrowed money.
Next, the reading presents an argument that, it is impossible to remember the details of a conversation happened years ago and accuracy and authenticity of conversation between Chevalier and famous writer Voltaire is in question. The lecture dismisses this argument and points out that, various witnesses have confirmed that Chevalier had a habit of writing and keeping notes after conversation. He used to refer those notes whenever he wrote.
Lastly, the reading passage asserts that, Chevalier falsified details to show his life in a different light to readers; to make the reading more enjoyable. He did not escape the prison in Venice by making a hole in the ceiling, instead he used his high connections to bribe his way out. However, the lecture refuses the claim and states that, there were other inmates in the prison who had more powerful connections than Chevalier and they could have easily got out, but they could not. This provides a support to Chevalier's claim that he escaped through ceiling. Moreover, the professor adds that, the ceiling needed repair after his escape.
In conclusion, the lecture rejects the arguments cited by the author in the passage and states that, Chevalier's memoir is pretty accurate and reliable historian source.
- TPO-42 - Integrated Writing Task Glass is a favored building material for modern architecture, yet it is also very dangerous for wild birds. Because they often cannot distinguish between glass and open air, millions of birds are harmed every year when the 80
- TPO-02 - Integrated Writing Task In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages. First of all, a group of people 96
- TPO-49 - Integrated Writing Task Like many creatures, humpback whales migrate long distances for feeding and mating purposes. How animals manage to migrate long distances is often puzzling. In the case of humpback whales, we may have found the answer: the 76
- TPO-24 - Integrated Writing Task Animal fossils usually provide very little opportunity to study the actual animal tissues, because in fossils the animals' living tissues have been largely replaced by minerals. Thus, scientists were very excited recently 81
- TPO-32 - Integrated Writing Task Starting in the 1960s and continuing until the 1980s, sailors in Russian submarines patrolling the North Alantic and Arctic Ocean would occasionally hear strange sounds. These underwater noises reminded the submarine crews 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 170, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...accurate and reliable historian source.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, lastly, moreover, regarding, so, then, while, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1685.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 320.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.265625 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22948505376 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67733360536 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553125 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 507.6 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 51.6680916572 49.2860985944 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.1176470588 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8235294118 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05882352941 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => 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: 0.451243380584 0.272083759551 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142864687359 0.0996497079465 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0586159442102 0.0662205650399 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227209016737 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0713765731446 0.0443174109184 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.