The reading states that one of the pictures by Rembrandt was not painted by him. However, the lecturer disagrees and claims that it was Rembrandt's.
Some experts have doubts that one of the pictures from Rembrandt was not painted by him for some reasons. But the lecturer disagree with arguments and claim that this painting was written by him.
The first argument is incosistence in dressing of a woman on a painting. She is wearing such things, that she cannot afford. Lecturer talks that analysis shows that someone added a specific white linean cap to increase value of painting, so the original paintind does not have it. Therefore, Rembrand may be consistent in his style of representing woman as realistic as it possible.
The second argument is absence of light and shadows. It is said earlier, that author loves realisticity, so he always had painted difficult shadows, but there are not on a this specific painting. Lecturer argues that someone added some things on a painting, so because of it he may close the original shadows. Moreover, the analysis showed that original painting had such lights, so it may be Rembrandt.
The last doubt is that author mad all his paintings on the one wood panel, but this specific painting has lots of other pieces. Lecturers found that other people increased the value of this painting by additional wood. The original panel was from the same tree as other paintings of Rembrandt.
Despite all criticism by other people this picture was removed from list of Rembrandt’s paintings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 170, Rule ID: DT_DT[2]
Message: Maybe you need to remove the second determiner so that only 'a' or 'this' is left.
Suggestion: a; this
...difficult shadows, but there are not on a this specific painting. Lecturer argues that...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, moreover, second, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1154.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 232.0 270.72406181 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97413793103 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63690254911 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 126.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.543103448276 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 348.3 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.3445402216 49.2860985944 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 82.4285714286 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5714285714 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.71428571429 7.06452816374 53% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
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: 0.303317881467 0.272083759551 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108787171421 0.0996497079465 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121247459933 0.0662205650399 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.197737417319 0.162205337803 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.1607528423 0.0443174109184 363% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 13.3589403974 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.25 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.