The lecture and the passage both argue the womans's face portrait which is related to Rembrandt. While the passage contends that the painting is not related to Rembrandt, the lecture refute this stance by explaining more details about the doubts.
First, the passage discuss an inconsistency of the painting which could be seen in the way woman is dressed. But the lecture says that recent investigation denies this claim under an X-ray detector which proves that the fur collar was added to the painting later.
Second, according to the reading, there is an opposition in the painting between light and shadow which is in contrast with Rembrandt's previous works who is expert in this field. Again, the professor defends her claim, saying that this problem is because of the fur collar which was painted over the top of the original painting a hundred years after it had been made.
Finally, in accordance with the passage, if the elderly woman's face painting was one of Rembrandt's portraits, there would be one piece of wood instead of severals glued together. On the contrary the professor states that the original one was painted on a single piece of wood. Moreover she says that the researchers found the wood which is used for mentioned painting very same as another Rembrandt's painting.
- TPO-03 - Integrated Writing Task Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him. One such painting is known as attributed to Rem 73
- TPO-03 - Integrated Writing Task Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him. One such painting is known as attributed to Rem 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 278, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
... was painted on a single piece of wood. Moreover she says that the researchers found the...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, moreover, second, so, while, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1084.0 1373.03311258 79% => OK
No of words: 217.0 270.72406181 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99539170507 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.8380880478 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48518300206 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.571428571429 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 317.7 419.366225166 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.1297451818 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.444444444 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1111111111 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.11111111111 7.06452816374 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.510523752235 0.272083759551 188% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.219092883642 0.0996497079465 220% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0651122750156 0.0662205650399 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.300890001499 0.162205337803 185% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0814559454485 0.0443174109184 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 63.6247240618 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.