sdsd
According to the reading, a recently discovered painting is an early work by the famous American painter James McNeill Whistler. The lecture, however, argues that the painting is probably not by Whistler.
First, the reading argues that the painting was painted by Whistler because it was included in an art show arranged by one of Whistler's friends. The lecturer argues, however, that this is not good evidence. That's because many paintings were included in that show, not only paintings by Whistler.
Second, the lecturer argues that lots of other painters could have done this painting. The model in the painting appeared in the paintings of lots of other painters at that time. Moreover, the monochromatic style that was used in this painting was used by many other painters in that same era.
Finally, the butterfly that is painted on the painting is not evidence the painting is by Whistler either. Whistler used a butterfly as a signature on his paintings, but this butterfly is a different shape and color, and it is in a different position too. In fact, the lecture says that the butterfly was added later, probably to make people think the painting was painted by Whistler.
In conclusion, the evidence given in the reading in favor of attributing the painting to Whistler is shown by the lecture to be unconvincing.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-09 | kaminisingh | 3 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 208, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...owever, that this is not good evidence. Thats because many paintings were included in...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1118.0 1373.03311258 81% => OK
No of words: 223.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0134529148 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69527990625 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 101.0 145.348785872 69% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.452914798206 0.540411800872 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 335.7 419.366225166 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.8661233998 49.2860985944 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 93.1666666667 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5833333333 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.16666666667 7.06452816374 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.5 8.42419426049 89% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 63.6247240618 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => 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.