lecturer
The reading and the lecture are both about the life of Chevalier de Seingalt and how his memories were recounted. Whereas the author of the reading states that his memories are not accurate and has some controversial point. The professor suggests that its memories are actually reliable, and all points can be answered. The lecturer casts doubt on the main point made in the reading by providing three reasons.
First of all, the reading states that He was not be very wealthy because he spent a lot of money on parties and gambling. However, the lecturer disputes this point. She says that he sold some properties and also borrowing money from his friends. Furthermore, she mentions that other people borrowed the money that he spent on parties.
Secondly, according to the reading, he could not capture those conversations accurately. Nevertheless, the lecturer refutes this argument. She argues that He wrote in papers those conversations were held with Voltaire immediately after took place. In addition, she points out that there are witnesses that saw Chevalier was checking his notes after conversations.
Finally, the reading claim that he did not escape from prison in Venice. Nonetheless, the lecturer believes that it was possible because that prison was ancient. She thinks that it also was possible since the ceiling’s prison was to be repaired.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-23 | Seyed Armin Mirhosseini | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-13 | Seyed Armin Mirhosseini | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-02 | YasamanEsml | 76 | view |
| 2023-05-11 | fmichela | 80 | view |
| 2023-04-10 | Yam Kumar Oli | 86 | view |
- Young people enjoy life more than older people do 60
- the table below shows the proportion of income adults and children spent on four common categories in the UK in 1998 73
- otters 80
- Which transportation vehicle has changed people's lives? 68
- The graph below shows the number of people with food allergies per quarter 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 50, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...all, the reading states that He was not be very wealthy because he spent a lot of ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, whereas, as to, in addition, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1152.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 221.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21266968326 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85565412703 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75340760787 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.561085972851 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 346.5 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 21.9832259285 49.2860985944 45% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 76.8 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.7333333333 21.698381199 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.86666666667 7.06452816374 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186298001049 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0881216695107 0.0996497079465 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.129131024059 0.0662205650399 195% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116338062105 0.162205337803 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.035903873501 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.