The reading and the lecture both are discussing the painting of Rembrandt. The reading questions one of the Rembrandt's paintings asking "Was it actually Rembrandt's work?" There are various attributes that the author lists which were generally used by the painter but are absent in the painting. The professor casts doubts on each of the claims presented in the passage. She asserts that the painting was surely drawn by Rembrandt however there were some updates made after years which the author fails to notice.
First of all, the author claims that the woman in the painting is wearing the white linen cap usually wear by servants together with luxurious fur collar which a servant can hardly afford. The author further points out that this is not the quality Rembrandt possess. The point is challenged by the professor. She points out that the painting was updated 100 years later as the collar was not the part of the painting.
Secondly, the author of the analytical piece argues that the face appears to be illuminated by light which reflected from below where the fur collar lies which itself would absorb most of the it. He further questions "How Rembrandt could make such an error?" The professor refutes this by stating that the painting was updated with a fur collar whereas the original painting includes a simple collar which fails to absorb the light. Researchers found that this simple white collar was the reason the light reflected and eventually illuminated the lady's face.
Finally, the author states that Rembrandt used to paint on single wood panels quite often however the painting contained a panel glued together with several pieces of wood. On the other hand, the professor states that the painting was updated a century later resulting myriad changes. And as the result the painting was enlarged by appending several wood pieces so as to make it grand and more original. In addition, the same tree wood was used when several pieces were aggregated to enlarge the original or existing panel. This is enough evidence to prove that the painting was an eminent masterpiece of Rembrandt.
In conclusion, the professor effectively refutes each of the claims and theories presented in the passage.
- TOEFL T P O 4 Integrated Writing Task 48
- TPO-05 - Integrated Writing Task As early as the twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their "great houses," massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand th 86
- TPO-15 - Integrated Writing Task The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers' crops by eating harmful insec 60
- TPO-08 - Integrated Writing Task Toward the end of his life, the Chevalier de Seingalt (1725-1798) wrote a long memoir recounting his life and adventures. The Chevalier was a somewhat controversial figure, but since he met many famous people, including ki 86
- 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 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 306, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...painter but are absent in the painting. The professor casts doubts on each of the c...
^^^
Line 5, column 189, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'it'?
Suggestion: the; it
... lies which itself would absorb most of the it. He further questions 'How Rembran...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 363, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...larged by appending several wood pieces so as to make it grand and more original. In add...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'however', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'whereas', 'as to', 'in addition', 'in conclusion', 'first of all', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.251231527094 0.261695866417 96% => OK
Verbs: 0.172413793103 0.158904122519 109% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0689655172414 0.0723426182421 95% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0566502463054 0.0435111971325 130% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0172413793103 0.0277247811725 62% => OK
Prepositions: 0.115763546798 0.128828473217 90% => OK
Participles: 0.051724137931 0.0370669169778 140% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.49227624227 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0172413793103 0.0208969081088 83% => OK
Particles: 0.00492610837438 0.00154638098197 319% => OK
Determiners: 0.160098522167 0.128158765124 125% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00738916256158 0.0158828679856 47% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0197044334975 0.0114777025283 172% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2245.0 1645.83664459 136% => OK
No of words: 369.0 271.125827815 136% => OK
Chars per words: 6.08401084011 6.08160592843 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.04852973271 108% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.390243902439 0.374372842146 104% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.279132791328 0.287516216867 97% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.19512195122 0.187439937562 104% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.124661246612 0.113142543107 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49227624227 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479674796748 0.539623497131 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 50.4545896227 53.8517498576 94% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0529801325 130% => OK
Sentence length: 21.7058823529 21.7502111507 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.828456982 49.3711431718 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.058823529 132.220823453 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7058823529 21.7502111507 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.823529411765 0.878197800319 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.39072847682 88% => OK
Readability: 49.6191614857 50.5018328374 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.7 1.90840788429 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.703806815913 0.549887131256 128% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.148004769489 0.142949733639 104% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.073262671445 0.0787303798458 93% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.694812728637 0.631733273073 110% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.118882034117 0.139662658121 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.364583907964 0.266732575781 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721163089359 0.103435571967 70% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.506502973863 0.414875509568 122% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.126253624981 0.0530846634433 238% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.510098047243 0.40443939384 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102184013794 0.0528353158467 193% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.26048565121 164% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 3.49668874172 172% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.62251655629 110% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 3.1766004415 220% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 10.2958057395 165% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Less content wanted. Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.