Rembrandt
The listening passage completely refutes the reading. The reading passage concludes that based on three reasons, the portrait of the woman might not be created by Rembrandt, whereas the speaker contradicts the reading by presenting the following three counter arguments.
To begin with, the professor states that the fur collar is proven to be an addition after the creation of the art work by utilizing X-ray and other analysis in order to increase the value of the work This directly challenge the argument in the reading that the erratic dressing of the woman may not made by Rembrandt in that he was a prudent person and looked out for every detail.
Secondly, the lecturer suggests that if the additional collar is removed, the light will actually illuminate the face and result in a feeling of reality, and the arrangement of light and shadow is really the style of Rembrandt. However, the author indicates that the dark collar absorbs light form below and thus causing a shadow on the woman's face, which is not the error Rembrandt probably made. Apparently, this is another place where the listening disapproves of the reading.
Finally,the speaker mentions that the wood panel was expanded to make it see awesome and precious. In addition, the wood is attested to be from the same tree which Rembrandt exploited for other art works. This is contrary to the claim in the reading that several wood panels were glued together, and this method is never viewed in Rembrandt' creation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-02 | nusybah | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-06 | YasamanEsml | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-06 | YasamanEsml | 70 | view |
| 2023-04-23 | Yam Kumar Oli | 70 | view |
| 2023-02-24 | Muggle | 80 | view |
- the young are more able to take risk and learn new things than the elderly 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict 76
- whether it is more important to keep your old friends than it is to make new friends 70
- Rembrandt 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 272, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the following three counter arguments. To begin with, the professor states that...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...erson and looked out for every detail. Secondly, the lecturer suggests that if ...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... listening disapproves of the reading. Finally,the speaker mentions that the wo...
^^
Line 4, column 10, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...g disapproves of the reading. Finally,the speaker mentions that the wood panel wa...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, apparently, finally, however, if, look, may, really, second, secondly, so, thus, whereas, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1240.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 250.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97635364384 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54477975471 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 377.1 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => 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: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => 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: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 94.9823895308 49.2860985944 193% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.777777778 110.228320801 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7777777778 21.698381199 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.0 7.06452816374 198% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0835594020335 0.272083759551 31% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.029181741299 0.0996497079465 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0301426115481 0.0662205650399 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0504703413191 0.162205337803 31% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0195999381238 0.0443174109184 44% => 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: 15.8 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 53.8541721854 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.0289183223 114% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.