The reading passage and lecturer are both discussing one painting which was or was not painted by Rembrandt. The author claims three reason to explain that this paint was not for Rembrandt. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article. He says that all features in portrait are truely for Rembrandt.
To begin with, the writer states, the portrait is inconsistent about woman dressed. The women was wearing a white linen cap which is for servants and luxurious fur collar. Rembrandt was known for his pay attention to the details. This statement is challenged by professor. He mentions, that the orginal portrait did not have this fur. In addition, this will be added to painting to increase its value.
Second, the author asserts, the portrait lake the fitting between light and dark shodow. Face of painting was bright indecated that light reflex from below. But, in the same time, there is a dark area below the face, that is mean the light obsorbed instead of reflected. The professor refutes ths notion. He points out, the orginal paintinh had bright color below the face, But after orginal paint is removed by time, the portrait painted with new dark paint to increase the value of the portrait.
Finally, the author argues, back of painting composed of many panel which was made from many piece of wood. This is not Rembranbt manner. The lecturer contradicts this point. He mentions, these pieces of wood added later to portrait. Furthermore, the type of wood is the same as wood used in other painting for Rembrandt.
The reading passage and lecturer are both discussing one painting which was or was not painted by Rembrandt. The author claims three reason to explain that this paint was not for Rembrandt. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article. He says that all features in portrait are truely for Rembrandt.
To begin with, the writer states, the portrait is inconsistent about woman dresse. The women was wearing a white linen cap which is for servants and luxurious fur collar. Rembrandt was known for his pay attention to the details. This statement is challenged by professor. He mentions, that the orginal portrait did not have this fur. In addition, this will be added to painting to increase its value.
Second, the author asserts, the portrait lake the fitting between light and dark shodow. Face of painting was bright indecated that light reflex from below. But, in the same time, there is a dark area below the face, that is mean the light obsorbed instead of reflected. The professor refutes ths notion. He points out, the orginal paintinh had bright color below the face, But after orginal paint is removed by time, the portrait painted with new dark paint to increase the value of the portrait.
Finally, the author argues, back of painting composed of many panel which was made from many piece of wood. This is not Rembranbt manner. The lecturer contradicts this point. He mentions, these pieces of wood added later to portrait. Furthermore, the type of wood is the same as wood used in other painting for Rembrandt.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-31 | talelaldabous | 61 | view |
- The passage and lecture are both talking about using of vesseles which are found by archaelogist in Iraque as electric batteries The author claims three reasons which contradicts using of these vesseles as batteries The lecturer casts doubt on claim made 65
- The passage and lecture are both talking about United Kingdom artifacts The writer states three reasons which participate in limitation of these artifacts The lecturer in the other hand casts doubt on claim made in article She mentions Non of these reason 63
- Cars are paramount type of transportation they are one of necessary things in live whether cars in twenty years become fewer that today every one has a different view point Some believe in the following decades there are fewer cars other have different pe 60
- The passage and lecture are mainly about air purifiers the author claims that purifiers have beneficial effect to protect our health he gave three types of purifiers the lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article he says the purifiers are non effective 76
- Friends are very influnial part in our live It is a paramount thing to keep your friend But the eqestion is whether it is important to keep old friends or make new friends This can be weighed in many aspects To me I prefer to make new friends Admittedly S 66
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The reading passage and lecturer are bot...
^^
Line 1, column 193, 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.
... that this paint was not for Rembrandt. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in a...
^^^
Line 2, column 95, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[5]
Message: You should probably use: 'were'.
Suggestion: were
...nsistent about woman dresse. The women was wearing a white linen cap which is for ...
^^^
Line 3, column 234, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rk area below the face, that is mean the light obsorbed instead of reflected. The...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...to increase the value of the portrait. Finally, the author argues, back of pain...
^^^
Line 4, column 61, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun panel seems to be countable; consider using: 'many panels'.
Suggestion: many panels
...or argues, back of painting composed of many panel which was made from many piece of wood....
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 92, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun piece seems to be countable; consider using: 'many pieces'.
Suggestion: many pieces
...posed of many panel which was made from many piece of wood. This is not Rembranbt manner. ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, furthermore, second, so, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => 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: 1271.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 261.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86973180077 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38920764034 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547892720307 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 368.1 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 3.25607064018 307% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.1002423815 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 63.55 110.228320801 58% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.05 21.698381199 60% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.25 7.06452816374 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.27373068433 281% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.544529139251 0.272083759551 200% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.157865913144 0.0996497079465 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.181930983449 0.0662205650399 275% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.373024879912 0.162205337803 230% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.307957924349 0.0443174109184 695% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.0 13.3589403974 60% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.2 53.8541721854 140% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.0 11.0289183223 54% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.08 12.2367328918 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 4.5 10.7273730684 42% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The reading passage and lecturer are bot...
^^
Line 1, column 193, 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.
... that this paint was not for Rembrandt. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in a...
^^^
Line 2, column 95, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[5]
Message: You should probably use: 'were'.
Suggestion: were
...nsistent about woman dresse. The women was wearing a white linen cap which is for ...
^^^
Line 3, column 234, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rk area below the face, that is mean the light obsorbed instead of reflected. The...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...to increase the value of the portrait. Finally, the author argues, back of pain...
^^^
Line 4, column 61, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun panel seems to be countable; consider using: 'many panels'.
Suggestion: many panels
...or argues, back of painting composed of many panel which was made from many piece of wood....
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 92, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun piece seems to be countable; consider using: 'many pieces'.
Suggestion: many pieces
...posed of many panel which was made from many piece of wood. This is not Rembranbt manner. ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, furthermore, second, so, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => 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: 1271.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 261.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86973180077 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38920764034 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547892720307 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 368.1 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 3.25607064018 307% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.1002423815 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 63.55 110.228320801 58% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.05 21.698381199 60% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.25 7.06452816374 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.27373068433 281% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.544529139251 0.272083759551 200% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.157865913144 0.0996497079465 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.181930983449 0.0662205650399 275% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.373024879912 0.162205337803 230% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.307957924349 0.0443174109184 695% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.0 13.3589403974 60% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.2 53.8541721854 140% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.0 11.0289183223 54% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.08 12.2367328918 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 4.5 10.7273730684 42% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 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.