Is This Paragraph Grammatically Correct

Is this paragraph clear and grammatically correct?

A paragraph is the container for only one idea. Often, a longer paragraph can - and should - be divided into smaller units. Usually a large, complex idea is made up of smaller ideas and can be explained in more paragraphs with those smaller ideas. The point, though, is to have one coherent paragraph - all of the ideas in each sentence of the paragraph must relate to a single main point. That point is most often made in a topic sentence.Every sentence in a paragraph must be grammatically correct, in so much as that grammar aids in understanding the ideas that the writer would like to convey. The topic sentence, in particular, must be very well written and very clear to readers. You may also consider asking help from some writing services. Too many to find by googling it. Just make sure to be wise in choosing the right one. Choose the one that is highly recommended. For me, I would suggest http://Cheapestessay.com base on my own experience.

Is my paragraph logical and grammatically correct?

The logical part isn't a very big problem - that means it has some problems, but not terrible ones,- but the grammatical part is. Not just grammar, but composition, fails here and there in both versions of the paragraph. It doesn't seem that the writing is academic, so if it's supposed to be, it needs to be supplemented by cited sources, quotes, etc., and the second, third and fourth statements should be paragraphs of their own. If it isn't part of an essay, and it's just a statement of opinion, then what needs to be worked out is the punctuation and a few elements of sentence structure. Here's a segment with suggested edits:SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH Secondly, Hamel, as a true  patriot, wanted to inspire among his students a love for their country. He taught them about the past glory of France (how?), and wrote "France, Alsace" all over the classroom walls, and "Long Live France" on the blackboard.My version isn't a perfect version, nor the only way to edit this paragraph. It's just an example of some of the changes that can be made for the reader to connect better with the idea being expressed. I made changes to the spaces following signs of punctuation, which are incorrect in the draft. Also I chose different words like inspire instead of produce. Find the other changes I made and compare them to your original to see if you can get a sense of how to organize sentences.

Can you start a paragraph with “aunt” and be grammatically correct?

Aunt Sarah was the youngest, preceded by Aunt Mary and Auntie, the three maiden aunts that were my grandmother’s sisters. We visited them every summer, and it was a pleasure. Auntie was the oldest and the most foreboding, possibly because of the responsibilities she insisted were hers, but a wonderful person. Mary was motherly, and Sarah, a collage English teacher, was the most entertaining. They lived together and they helped us stay busy during our summer visits to their town. As a grandmother myself now, I still remember those days fondly.

Is this English paragraph grammatically correct?

Here I am just fixing grammar and punctuation; changes are in bold:"This was the first book that I took up to know more about India during the partition period. The language is not difficult to read but not as easy as "Ramchandra Guha's India After Gandhi" (which I am reading). The authors have made great efforts in research. The entire book, which is over 500 pages, covers a span of just 1-2 years. This book covers the riots, princes and their vices, politicians, Gandhi, and RSS. This is a great book for anyone who wants to know what India was like during partition. I did not know much about Indian partition when I first put my hands on this book, but I can say with fair amount of confidence that I now have some decent insights. There is one thing that I might want to mention here as criticism of this book and that is that the authors seem to be overly infatuated with Lord Mountbatten. They are full of praise for him. This is probably because they are the same authors whom Lord Mountbatten chose to write his biography. But that should not be a reason to abstain from this book."Here I'm making deeper changes, mostly making it more concise:     This was the first book that I read to find out more about India during its partition period. While it's not difficult to read, it's not as easy to understand as "Ramchandra Guha's India After Gandhi."      The book is well researched. It's more than 500 pages yet covers a span of just one to two years. It covers riots, unethical princes, politicians, Gandhi, and the RSS. This is a great book for anyone who wants to know what India was like during partition. I learned a lot from this book.     The only real flaw is that the authors seem overly infatuated with Lord Mountbatten. They have nothing but praise for him. This is probably because they are the same authors whom Lord Mountbatten chose to write his biography. But that should deter anyone from reading this book.You may use a different word from unethical if it's more suitable: immature, highly flawed, etc. I am also breaking it up into several paragraphs. You could also change the first sentence to avoid using "I," as suggested by Charles already. When you name a book, the title should be italicized if possible. If not, use underline. If that's not possible, use quotes around the title.