Please can someone kindly check the sentence structure and any wrong grammar.
For example, Source B and C, these sources suggest that Stalin was too mad and mentally unstable to rule the country. Source C also suggests that he would not have anyone better than him, ¡§Stalin will not let him live¡¨. From this, I deduce that if any politicians who were better than him in the party, he would be removed from his post next morning. Therefore these sources, as well as being too mad, too imply that he carried out the purges as an excuse for personal reasons. Such as, eliminating his political opponents, and people that he disliked. So perhaps the purges happened after all not because of the people being the enemies of the USSR but the enemies of Stalin. Yet again, when we look at the origin of this source I notice one was written by Trotsky and one by Bukharin. Source B was written by Trotsky suggests that this source would be biased against Stalin since Trotsky was an enemy of Stalin and Trotsky was sent to exile. Source C, however, would not be as biased, although Bukharin was not an enemy of Stalin, he would not know that he was to put on show trial later.
Thank you very much for your time and help!
For example, sources B and C suggest that Stalin was too angry and mentally unstable to rule the country. Source C also suggests that he would not tolerate anyone better than himself: "Stalin will not let him live." From this, I deduce that, if there were any politicians in the party whom Stalin considered better than himself in some way, he would remove them from their posts the next morning. Therefore these sources imply that he carried out the purges for personal reasons, such as eliminating his political opponents and people he disliked. Perhaps the purges happened after all, not because people were considered enemies of the USSR, but because they were enemies of Stalin. Yet again, when we look at the origin of this source, I notice one was written by Trotsky and one by Bukharin. Source B, written by Trotsky, was probably biased against Stalin since Trotsky was considered an enemy of Stalin and sent to exile. Source C, however, would not be as biased; although Bukharin was not an enemy of Stalin, he would not know that he was to be put on trial later.
Read carefully and make changes in your original. Let me know any questions you have about the changes I've made.
Thanks, your help is great!
But
Do you mind doing my whole essay? (800words)
No, sorry. I won't do the entire essay!! Then it wouldn't be YOUR writing; it'd be mine.
Finish the rough draft and then have someone read it aloud to you. Wherever the person stumbles and has to reread a section, you'll know there's a problem to be fixed.
Once you've written, proofed, and proofed with someone else, then repost, and I'll take a look at it. Just make sure you don't keep committing the same errors as in the paragraph above.
On the whole, the sources do support this idea that the purges were to defend against its enemies, however the reliability of these sources are not totally trustworthy. On the other hand, there are several sources which disagree with the title, yet when I look at their provenances, they seem to be more reliable than the others.
For example, some sources support this statement, such as source A. Source A portrays Trotsky as a traitor to Russia and a spy to the Nazis. This propaganda supports the title statement because it suggests that if Stalin did not eliminate its enemies, millions soldiers would die as it shows Trotsky washing soldiers¡¦ blood in a Prussia army¡¦s helmet. However, the reliability of this source is comparatively low. From facts, we know that Trotsky was not an enemy of USSR but Stalin. Therefore we can deduce that this source might not be totally true.
Another example where the source agrees with the title is source E. Source E is a Russian Communist Party newspaper. From this extract, it tells us that if Russia got rid of all the spies, provocateurs, wrecker and diversionists, people would be happier than ever before. Once more, this source does tell us that Stalin carried out the purges to make the Russians better off. Then again, if we look its provenance, this would be a propaganda to the Russians. As a result, the content would be edited by member of the Party, which to support Stalin. From this, I can infer that this source would not have been very reliable.
Source F and H, also, provides a really good case that he carried out his purges to defend Russia. Source F shows Stalin is executing the four traitors of Russia, which explains why he carried out the purges. Although the cartoonist has drawn the accused confessing, in spite of that if we look at the facts, it will tell us that only few actually committed the crime, also some were tortured or confessed out of loyalty to the party. This suspects that the cartoonist has drawn this to create a sarcastic effect. Source H tells us that if Russia ¡§rout¡¨ all its enemies, it would create a better Russia for them and Stalin. However, this source is highly unreliable because when we compare the two speeches Khrushchev made, source H and I, these show that he was under pressure to make this speech, if he had not, he would be suspicious of being an enemy to Russia and put on show trials.
On the other hand, there are many source understandably would argue with this title statement, such as, sources which suggest that he was mad, protecting communism or he was not responsible.
For example, sources B and C suggest that Stalin was too angry and mentally unstable to rule the country. Source C also suggests that he would not tolerate anyone better than himself: "Stalin will not let him live." From this, I deduce that, if there were any politicians in the party whom Stalin considered better than himself in some way, he would remove them from their posts the next morning. Therefore these sources imply that he carried out the purges for personal reasons, such as eliminating his political opponents and people he disliked. Perhaps the purges happened after all, not because people were considered enemies of the USSR, but because they were enemies of Stalin. Yet again, when we look at the origin of this source, I notice one was written by Trotsky and one by Bukharin. Source B, written by Trotsky, was probably biased against Stalin since Trotsky was considered an enemy of Stalin and sent to exile. Source C, however, would not be as biased; although Bukharin was not an enemy of Stalin, he would not know that he was to be put on trial later.
Source D tells us that Stalin was not responsible for his actions. Stalin¡¦s daughter reveals that Beria influenced Stalin to make all these ruthlessness decision. Then again, when we look at its provenance, this infers that Svetlana would have not written anything pessimistic about Stalin. Therefore this source cannot be entirely trustworthy.
Source G also suggests that Stalin was overly mad. This source tells us that Stalin would bribe every juries and prosecutor, which Stalin hold complete control of the court. Anyone who opposed him would put himself on show trials. Overall, this source partly agrees with source C, implying that Stalin used the purges for personal reasons. When looking at its derivation, this source would be reasonably reliable since this was published in France.
Lastly, Source I insinuate that any opposition of Stalin would be wiped out so this we could interpret that the purges was not carried out to only the enemies of the USSR, but mostly who Stalin regards as enemy. I think this source is really important in order to raise this argument because Source H and I, were written by the same person, however, he gives a completely opposition view of the purges. This source would have not been biased because Khrushchev now is the leader of Russia, and he would be confident to speak out without anyone opposing him.
Overall, there are many sources provide a really good case that he carried out his purges to defend Russia, however, they cannot be totally trusted or highly unreliable because they were written by his creatures. Whereas, although sources B,C,D,G,I make less of a powerful argument, they are written with the benefit of hindsight, and neutral countries and people and can therefore be regarded as a genuine stab at the truth.
Well, do whatever you can!
any help is appreciated!
Paragraph 1 -- To what does "its" refer? This is called a vague pronoun reference, and needs to be rephrased so the sentence is clear.
The use of the word "title" is also vague: title of what?
Check for run-ons and fix all that you find.
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/runons.htm
Paragraph 2 -- Unclear references still continue. For example:
"a spy to the Nazis" <~~He spied on the Nazis for the Russians? Or he spied on the Russians for the Nazis?
Again, I find "its" which doesn't agree with (match) any preceeding noun.
...
As I said before, have someone read this whole paper aloud to you -- then fix the places where you note errors or where the reader stumbles.
Use this index to find help with punctuation and other topics in grammar and usage:
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/index2.htm
When checking the sentence structure and grammar of a passage, it's important to carefully analyze each sentence for clarity and correctness. Here's a breakdown of the passage you provided:
1. "For example, Source B and C, these sources suggest that Stalin was too mad and mentally unstable to rule the country."
- This sentence is clear in expressing the suggestion from two sources, but it could be improved grammatically by adding "both" before "Source B and C." Also, it would be better to use "to rule" instead of "to rule the country" for conciseness.
Suggested revision: "For example, both Source B and C suggest that Stalin was too mad and mentally unstable to rule."
2. "Source C also suggests that he would not have anyone better than him, 'Stalin will not let him live.'"
- This sentence is grammatically correct in terms of structure, but the use of single quotation marks may not be preferred. Consider using double quotation marks instead.
Suggested revision: "Source C also suggests that he would not have anyone better than him, 'Stalin will not let him live.'"
3. "From this, I deduce that if any politicians who were better than him in the party, he would be removed from his post next morning."
- This sentence is clear in conveying your deduction based on the information provided. However, for clarity, it would be better to use "their" instead of "his" to refer to politicians.
Suggested revision: "From this, I deduce that if any politicians who were better than him in the party, they would be removed from their posts the next morning."
4. "Therefore these sources, as well as being too mad, too imply that he carried out the purges as an excuse for personal reasons."
- This sentence seems to have a repetition of "too" that doesn't fit grammatically. Consider removing one "too" to improve the sentence. Also, it would be clearer to say "motivated by personal reasons" instead of "an excuse for personal reasons."
Suggested revision: "Therefore, these sources suggest that he carried out the purges, being mad and motivated by personal reasons."
5. "Such as, eliminating his political opponents, and people that he disliked."
- This sentence is structurally correct, but it would be clearer to use "for example" to introduce the examples.
Suggested revision: "For example, eliminating his political opponents and people he disliked."
6. "So perhaps the purges happened after all not because of the people being the enemies of the USSR but the enemies of Stalin."
- This sentence is grammatically correct, but it could be clearer by using "rather than" instead of "but."
Suggested revision: "So perhaps the purges happened after all not because of the people being the enemies of the USSR, but rather the enemies of Stalin."
7. "Yet again, when we look at the origin of this source I notice one was written by Trotsky and one by Bukharin."
- This sentence is grammatically correct, but it would be clearer to use "sources" instead of "source."
Suggested revision: "Yet again, when we look at the origins of these sources, I notice one was written by Trotsky and one by Bukharin."
8. "Source B was written by Trotsky suggests that this source would be biased against Stalin since Trotsky was an enemy of Stalin and Trotsky was sent to exile."
- This sentence is not grammatically correct. You could rephrase it by using "suggests" after mentioning Trotsky's authorship and separating the reason with a comma.
Suggested revision: "The fact that Source B was written by Trotsky suggests that this source may be biased against Stalin since Trotsky was an enemy of his and was sent into exile."
9. "Source C, however, would not be as biased, although Bukharin was not an enemy of Stalin, he would not know that he was to put on a show trial later."
- This sentence is clear in terms of structure, but it could be improved by using "but" instead of "although" to make the contrast more effective. Also, consider rephrasing the latter part for clarity.
Suggested revision: "Source C, however, would not be as biased, but since Bukharin was not an enemy of Stalin, he would not have known that he would be put on a show trial later."
I hope these suggested revisions help improve the sentence structure and grammar of your passage. Remember to carefully proofread your work for any further adjustments or improvements.