The reading the painting cannot be attributed to Rembrandt. The lecturer, however, suggests that painting could be created by Rembrandt.
The reading and the passage are both about the Rembrandt’s painting. According to the reading passage, the painting cannot be Rembrandt’s, given a number of problems that do not allow to suppose that it was painted by the artist. The lecturer casts doubt on the claim made in the article. Using the following evidence, she suggests that painting could be created by Rembrandt.
First of all, the lecturer states that X-rays and analysis of pigment showed that the fur collar was not a part of the painting, and it painted atop the original painting years after it was created. The reason was to increase the value of the painting by adding the elements of aristocratic clothes. These findings counter the reading point, according to which a servant could not afford this kind clothes, so the presence of the collar on the servant is the proof that Rembrandt could not make such a blunt mistake.
Secondly, lecturer suggests is convinced that the face of the character is not in partial shadow because of the top layer of the color that was removed years before now. We observe the original color that reflects light and illuminates woman’s face, and that is why it is not placed in the partial shadow. The author of the article casts doubt in this claim and says that Rembrandt was a master of lighting and could not mistakenly put too dark colors in the painting.
Finally, lecturer is persuaded that the wood panel was enlarged during the process of removing the top layer to make the painting look bigger. Recent research has shown that the added wood panel was made from the same tree as the original painting was. The author states that, contrary to the opinion of the lecturer, the painting was not created by Rembrandt as it was made on the several pieces of wood clued together. The adds that no painting of this artist was made this way, and this is the reason why the painting was not made by Rembrandt.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 185, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'supposing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'allow' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: supposing
... a number of problems that do not allow to suppose that it was painted by the artist. The ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, look, second, secondly, so, as to, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 10.4613686534 220% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1586.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 337.0 270.72406181 124% => OK
Chars per words: 4.70623145401 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41550681934 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.456973293769 0.540411800872 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 467.1 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.2366227831 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.285714286 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0714285714 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 7.06452816374 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.363822300583 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143098071014 0.0996497079465 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.126220683769 0.0662205650399 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253539916948 0.162205337803 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.183285742223 0.0443174109184 414% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 53.8541721854 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 63.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.0 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.