Hi,I would really appreciate it if someone could read over this short paragraph about the Industrial revolution and point out my grammar errors. Thanks alot. Emotion: smile

However, it would be unfair to say that the two books cover two totally separate aspects of the revolution; they do share some common grounds. Both books begin with a fair strong introduction on the Revolution that helps to prepare the reader for the contents about to be expressed. A talk about the preconditions of the Revolution follows immediately with the main focus on the role the British played. Although a few remarkets about Germany, Belgium and are made here and there. The steam engine is mentioned in both works as the key invention that started the revolution and kept it going. Conditions of the lower classes during the revolution are covered extremely well and there is a special emphasize on the new class conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie (the “haves and the “have not”). It would not be unreasonable to say that about half of the pages on the Industrial Revolution in both books were devoted to that area. The short coming of both works lies in the fact that neither talked much about the economic effects of the revolution. Most of the information regarding economic effects is gathered from paragraphs devoted to other areas. Thus, the key ideas are merely introduced rather than explored fully. Similarly, for political effects, the books tend to go into the specifics and certain important effects are often ignored (One focus on Marxism while the other on early Socialism).The social aspects, even though it is overemphasized, is only expressed in terms of the “general worker”. Women are given absolutely no mention while only a few sentences are devoted to children. Both books conclude nicely by making a reference to the development of the modern society that follows (Congress of Vienna and Revolutions of 1848 to name a few).
However, it would be unfair to say that the two books cover two totally separate aspects of the revolution; they do share/have some similarities (I'm not sure if "common grounds" is wrong but it sounds odd imho). Both books begin with a fairly strong introduction on the Revolution that helps to prepare the reader for the contents about to be expressed. A talk about the preconditions of the Revolution follows immediately with the main focus on the role the British played (this doesn't sound that well, maybe: The next part/chapter (?) is concerned/deals with the preconditions of the Revolution and focuses on the role the British played) . Also a few remarks about Germany, Belgium and France are made here and there. The steam engine is mentioned in both works as the key invention that started the revolution and kept it going. Conditions of the lower classes during the revolution are covered extremely well and there is a special emphasize on the new class conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie (the “haves and the “have not”). It would not be unreasonable to say that about half of the pages on the Industrial Revolution in both books were devoted to that theme. The shortcoming of both works is the fact that neither talked much about the economic impact of the revolution and the rare pieces of information concerning the impact are gathered from paragraphs devoted to other themes. Thus, the key ideas are merely introduced rather than fully explored. Similarly, as to political effects, the books tend to go into too much detail and certain important effects are often ignored (one focuses on Marxism whereas the other does on early Socialism).The social aspects, even though they are overemphasized, are only expressed in terms of the “general worker”. Women are not mentioned at all while only a few sentences are devoted to children. Both books conclude nicely with a reference to the development of the modern society that follows (Congress of Vienna and Revolutions of 1848 to name a few).

I hope I was of some help...
However, it would be unfair to say that the two books cover two totally separate aspects of the revolution; they do share some common ground. Both books begin with a fair [delete - unnecessary] strong introduction on the Revolution that helps to prepare the reader for the contents about to be expressed [theories/concepts - NOT contents]. A talk [in this context, Discussion would be a better word to use] about the preconditions of the Revolution follows immediately with the main focus on the role the British played, although a few remarks about Germany, Belgium and France are made here and there. The steam engine is mentioned in both works as the key invention that started the revolution and kept it going. Conditions of the lower classes during the revolution are covered extremely well and there is a special emphasize [this is the verb - you need the noun] on the new class conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie (the “haves" and the “have nots”). It would not be unreasonable to say that about half of the pages on the Industrial Revolution in both books were devoted to that area ["area" is incorrect in this context -theme/discussion/analysis] . The shortcoming of both works lies in the fact that neither talked [ wrong tense - you have been using the present] much about the economic effects of the revolution. Most of the information regarding economic effects is gathered from paragraphs devoted to other areas. Thus, the key ideas are merely introduced rather than explored fully. Similarly, for political effects, the books tend to go into the specifics and certain important effects are often ignored (One focus [this should be the verb {focuses}] on Marxism while the other concentrates on early Socialism). The social aspects, even though it is [this needs to agree with the plural “social aspects”] overemphasized, is [this needs to agree with the plural “social aspects”] only expressed in terms of the “general worker”. Women are given absolutely no mention while only a few sentences are devoted to children. Both books conclude nicely [delete – unnecessary] by making a reference to the development of the modern society that follows (the Congress of Vienna and Revolutions of 1848 to name a few).

"Revolution" is too general a term - in this context you need to refer specifically to the Industrial Revolution.
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Wow, this is great! Thanks alot to both of you for the help. Thank you both very much. Emotion: big smile