I'm reading Green's book ''Polynomial Representations of GL_n. with an Appendix on Schensted Correspondence and Littelmann Paths''.
Consider theorem 2.4b) part (i) on page 14:
Consider the map $e : K\Gamma \rightarrow S_K(n,r)$, defines as follows: For each $g\in \Gamma$ we define the element $e_g\in S_K(n,r)$ by $e_g(c):=c(g)$ for all $c\in A_K(n,r)$. We extend the map $g \mapsto e_g$ linearly and get a map $e : K\Gamma \rightarrow S_K(n,r)$ which is a morphism of $K$-algebras. Any function $f\in K^{\Gamma}$ has a unique extension to a linear map $f : K\Gamma → K$. With this convention, the image under $e$ of an element $\kappa=\sum \kappa_gg\in K\Gamma$ is ''evaluation at $\kappa$''; i.e. $e(\kappa) : c \mapsto c(\kappa)$, for all $c\in A_K(n,r)$.
Question: Why is $e$ surjective? Assume the contrary. Then I don't know, why there would exist some $0\neq c\in A_K(n,r)$, such that $e_g(c)=c(g)=0\ \forall\ g\in \Gamma$, if $\text{Im}(e)$ were a proper subspace of $S_K(n,r)={A_K(n,r)}^{*}$.
Any hints would be appreciated.
Thanks for the help!