“The study of history place too much emphasis on individuals. the most significant event and trend in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.”
In the statement the author asserts that history focused just to the individuals. However, important events were made by groups of people whose existence have been forgotten for long time. I agree with the author that history focused too much for individuals. However, I believe the author prejudices the issue by asserting important event were just possible by groups of people. In my opinion, both part are related to each other subtly and non of them were extant alone. The reasons to bolster my view point are elaborated upon hereunder.
First of all, history individuals indeed were accepted as a leader of a most of the people. Leaders always are the brain of any constitution. They can analyse the events better than other people and also they easily could penetrate to a domain groups. In a small scale, take a body of a human as an example, every part of it will preclude with lots of problems if brain can’t work precisely. Understanably the existence of a brain indeed leader are really important for organize, analyze, and managing different parts.
Second, in history leaders are defined as a concept and viewpoint of the most of the people. You know, I think it is not practical to mention all of the non famous people as a reference in a history book. I believe that the writers of the history books always take a outstanding one to explain the concept easily and understandably. I saw in libraries numerous history books that mentioned all of the important people names. However, they are just used for the ones who really carious to know an event progress bit by bit. In other way, non of us could read a small event in 1 year.
Last, As I said before in the first paragraph the groups of people were act as parts of a body. Therefore, I brain alone doesn’t have meaning alone and is uncompleted. Indeed, a brain alone can’t do anything without different parts of body.
In sum, Taking aforementioned reasons and examples into account, Famous individuals or groups of people both are equally important and we can’t account on one more than other. However, it is impractical to mention lots of group in history book that we all read. But their name were exist in reference history book for serious people in large libraries in different parts of the world.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 101, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[4]
Message: The adverb 'always' is usually put after the verb 'are'.
Suggestion: are always
...leader of a most of the people. Leaders always are the brain of any constitution. They can...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 143, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... I think it is not practical to mention all of the non famous people as a reference in a h...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 266, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...riters of the history books always take a outstanding one to explain the concept ...
^
Line 7, column 391, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...s numerous history books that mentioned all of the important people names. However, they a...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 283, Rule ID: WERE_VBB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'where' or 'we'?
Suggestion: where; we
...y book that we all read. But their name were exist in reference history book for ser...
^^^^
Line 13, column 288, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'existed'.
Suggestion: existed
...k that we all read. But their name were exist in reference history book for serious p...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 391, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...raries in different parts of the world.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, really, second, so, therefore, i think, you know, first of all, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1913.0 2235.4752809 86% => OK
No of words: 397.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81863979849 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67802612834 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 215.323595506 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.476070528967 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 616.5 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.7868773926 60.3974514979 48% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 83.1739130435 118.986275619 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2608695652 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.69565217391 5.21951772744 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292381977579 0.243740707755 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0828794366801 0.0831039109588 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.066113547176 0.0758088955206 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156996133357 0.150359130593 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0607768516553 0.0667264976115 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 14.1392134831 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.38 12.1639044944 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.46 8.38706741573 89% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 100.480337079 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.