The reading and the article are both about a portrait for the famous English novelist, Jane Austen. The author thinks provides three evidences to prove that the portrait is image of the Jane Austin, however, the speaker says that these evidences are not convincing, and he gives counter evidences that refutes the claims in the reading.
First of all, the article states that Austin's family gave permission to use the portrait as an illustration in her edition of her letters and recognized it as a portrait of the author. The professor, on the other hand, rebuts this claim by mentioning that happened after the death of Austin by more than 70 year, so none of them really saw her in her real life. As a result, they can not assure whether the painting is for Austin or not.
Second, the text argues that person in the portrait resembles the sketch that was drawn for Austin in the life and all the features are still similar to those teenage girl in the painting. The lecturer goes against this claim. He points out that there is no prove that this image is for Austin, and it could be for one her close relatives. He elaborates on this by stating that Austin had many members of the family that were in the same age at this time, especially one of her nieces who resembled her a lot.
Third, the reading claims that there is evidence that it was painted by Ozias Humphery, aman who lived in the same time of Austin , which gives prominent to this the supposition that is real image of her. The speaker, on contrast, rebuts this claim by explaining that the canvas used for the painting proved to be bought by someone that lived in another time long when Austin was in her 70s. Hence, it is unlikely to be an authentic portrait for Austin.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 45, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reading and the article are both about a portrait for the famous English novelist...
^^
Line 1, column 303, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing, and he gives counter evidences that refutes the claims in the reading. Fi...
^^
Line 8, column 130, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...man who lived in the same time of Austin , which gives prominent to this the suppo...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, really, second, so, still, then, third, as a result, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 22.412803532 192% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1436.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 316.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.54430379747 5.08290768461 89% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.29880377607 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51582278481 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 61.4118044208 49.2860985944 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.666666667 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3333333333 21.698381199 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.66666666667 7.06452816374 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.276242285085 0.272083759551 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110991657634 0.0996497079465 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0769098496279 0.0662205650399 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170032004538 0.162205337803 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0223441264292 0.0443174109184 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.35 12.2367328918 76% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.