Hallo 
habe die Tage irgendwann eine mündliche Englischprüfung zu absolvieren,
Ich soll
Argumente bringen, die dagegen sprechen, dass William Shakespeare der Autor der unter seinem Namen publizierten Werke ist.
dazu habe ich den folgenden diesen Text vorbereitet.
Ich bitte euch darum, dass ihr den Text kurz lest und mir Verbesserungsvorschläge in Sachen Formulierungen und Vokabular gebt
und falls euch sonst noch was einfällt, immer her damit
Today I will tell you about arguments which speak against Shakespeare as the autor of the works which were published under his name.
Shakespeare was a famous man in his time. He wrote a ton of plays.
But just like today, there were doubts about that he is the writer of the works.
the first big doubt came from an american woman, named Delia Bacon, which speculated that Shakespeare didn't write the plays hisself. (she went insane while proving her theory and died 3 years later in a asylum but there were many intelectual people which were also convinced about Shakespeare is not the autor.)
In the 19. century there was the highlight of authorship question.
There were 80 candidates which have been proposed.
(the most popular were Sir Francis Bacon, Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford; Christopher Marlowe)
till today the question is not answered.
But there are many theories which speak against Shakespeare. One of them is not refuted till today.
The main reason which raised most doubts about that shakespeare is the autor, is the fact
that it was almost impossible for a man of his class to have such an vocabulary and sophistication, which were shown in all his works. It is almost unbelievable that anyone has accomplished such things.
For example:
According to a study from Harvard there are 29.000 different words which were used by Shakespeare.
For comparison: A average guy knows 7 to 10 thousand words
not only the intelectual part does not match. Also
Shakespeare's biography, particularly his humble origins and obscure life stand in contrast to the work he performed
these Parts do not match.
And this theory led to the thesis that a nobleman had to be shakespeare.
The idea aroused much attention.
It is understandeble because the theatre had not a good reputation. So the Nobleman in order to avoid damage on his own reputation needed a guy which publishes his work.
A metaphorical result could be this one:
"Fortuna herself wanted to keep the name William Shakespeare in our mind as the great Genius behind the question."
my Opinon about the big question is
the whole big discussion about who is autor is not worth the trouble. You should spend your time with studying the storys which were written under the name William Shakespeare and not with critizing the history of the autor.
Danke für die Mühe!