Potrait of an elderly woman in a white bonnet
The reading describes doubts about “Portrait of an elderly woman in a white bonnet” a portrait, which was considered to be one of Rembrandt's paintings and gives three reasons to endorse its idea. On the other hand, the lecture provides counter-arguments by stating that careful re-examination has proved the portrait to be indeed Rembrandt’s piece of art.
To begin with, the author states that Rembrandt was known for paying closer attention to the details of his paintings, whereas the details of the woman’s luxury fur collar were not matching with the description of her dress. However, the Lecture refutes this claim by indicating that x-ray analysis has shown that the pigment of the fur is not matching with the original painting. As it was added over the top of the fur collar hundred years later to increase the value of the painting, and to make the portrait more valuable. Therefore, the details seemed different from the original.
Secondly, the writer describes that there is a shadow on the woman’s face from her black collar. It was impossible for Rembrandt to do such a blunder, as he was known to paint lights and shadows. The lecture opposes this argument by insisting that the painter was master to know the effect of shadowing and lighting. During the analysis, when fabricated pigment from the fur was removed, a light-colored collar was discovered under the black fur that clearly suggests this light color illuminated the woman’s face. Therefore, this is not an error made by the painter but by the fabricator.
Lastly, the writer points that if it was the painter’s original work it was not glued on several pieces of wooden panels because Rembrandt had not used several pieces of wood for any of his creations. The lecture clarifies this and explains that the original painting was on a single panel, but when the fur collar was added then the wooden frame was enlarged too with multiple panels. Another evidence is the source of the woody panel. Rembrandt had used the same wood source for creating another portrait, and this could not be a coincidence. So, extra panels were used later for enlargement purposes only.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 428, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a hundred'.
Suggestion: a hundred
...as added over the top of the fur collar hundred years later to increase the value of th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, whereas, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 10.4613686534 210% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1799.0 1373.03311258 131% => OK
No of words: 362.0 270.72406181 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96961325967 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68832222805 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 145.348785872 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.516574585635 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 541.8 419.366225166 129% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.0788716341 49.2860985944 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.4375 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.625 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.625 7.06452816374 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0917958787036 0.272083759551 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0318618442394 0.0996497079465 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0688852197819 0.0662205650399 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0699184267181 0.162205337803 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0747925779527 0.0443174109184 169% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 63.6247240618 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.