Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet
The article states that a portrait of a woman which attributed to Rembrandt could not be a work by him and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that all supporting reasons are true, but after some examinations the attribution of painting to Rembrandt was validated. The professor refutes each of author's reasons by explanation of the examinations.
First, the reading states that the details of painting such as dress of woman is inconsistent. The professor refutes this point by stating that the fur collar in the painting is not original, and there are some changing in the painting that was done after one hundred years in the painting which caused the validity of that.
Second, the article claims that light and shadow do not fit together in the painting. The professor contends that before adding some changes to the painting colors were realistic and the woman's dress had a light color and colors had good harmony with each other.
Third, the reading avers that the panel of painting was made from pieces of wood which is not the panels the Rembrandt was using. The lecture opposes this point by saying that during amending of painting some pieces were added to make it more grand and valuable. Also, she states that the pieces of wood which were glued in the painting are from same tree that Rembrandt used for his other paintings.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-06 | YasamanEsml | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-07 | ayumiyazaki | 81 | view |
| 2022-12-09 | Kairavishah2001 | 73 | view |
| 2022-11-16 | rpinisetti8 | 73 | view |
| 2022-10-13 | EiLonMask | 73 | view |
- Because modern life is very complex, it is essential for young people to have the ability to plan and organize. 70
- Chaco Structure 70
- TPO 41 integrated 85
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more important to keep your old friends than it is to make new friends. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 66
- TPO 45_Integrated writing (bee’s fossils) 3
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, second, so, third, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1141.0 1373.03311258 83% => OK
No of words: 234.0 270.72406181 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87606837607 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91114542567 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44700197927 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 145.348785872 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.508547008547 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 339.3 419.366225166 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.4477325661 49.2860985944 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.1 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.3 7.06452816374 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.0480676904263 0.272083759551 18% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0234498924378 0.0996497079465 24% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0401813948753 0.0662205650399 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0324566669782 0.162205337803 20% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.022624180181 0.0443174109184 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 53.8541721854 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 63.6247240618 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.