The article contends that a painting known as 'Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet' has been wrongly attributed to Rembrandt. The article provides three reasons to defend the conclusion. The speaker, however, disagrees with the article and posits that a reassessment of the painting does not support the conclusion. She also provides three counter-arguments for the same.
First, the article says that the inconsistency about the way the woman in the portrait is dressed is not a mistake Rembrandt would make; who was known for his attention to detail of his subject's clothing. The speaker, on the contrary, provides information that after assessing the X-Rays of the colour pigments in the portrait, it was concluded that the fur collar was added several years after the painting was originally painted. Thus, someone else had added this to enhance the value of the painting by depicting a wealthy woman. The original painting did not have such inconsistencies.
Second, the contradiction between light reflection and the shadow is highlighted in the article. According to the article, Rembrandt was a master in painting light and shadow and hence, he wouldn't have made such an error. Although, the speaker agrees with the article's claim regarding Rembrandt, but she goes on to say that the original painting depicted a woman wearing a white coloured cloth that reflected light and hence, the face is illuminated. The extra fur collar added later, was the reason for the contradiction in light and shadow.
Third, the article states that Rembrandt painted on a single wood panel and never used to glue the panels together. However, the portait is painted on several pieces of wood glued together. The speaker, argues that someone had glued extra wood panels to the original painting and painted over it in order to make it look grand and thus, increase it's value. The speaker also provides evidence regarding the same. She states that the original wood panel of the painiting is from the same tree whose panel was used in another painting of Rembrandt - a self portrait with hat.
In sum, the speaker disapproves of the article's conclusion and provides three cogent arguments for the same, each countering the three arguments of the article.
- It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects than to specialize in one specific subject. 73
- The extended family is less important now than it was in the past. 70
- Rembrandt 73
- Archaeologists have recently found a fossil of a 150-million-year-old mammalknown as Repenornamus robustus (R. robustus). Interestingly, the mammal'sstomach contained the remains of a psittacosaur dinosaur. Some researchers havetherefore suggested that R. 73
- Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 197, 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.
...three reasons to defend the conclusion. The speaker, however, disagrees with the ar...
^^^
Line 5, column 190, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...painting light and shadow and hence, he wouldnt have made such an error. Although, the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 40, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'articles'' or 'article's'?
Suggestion: articles'; article's
... In sum, the speaker disapproves of the articles conclusion and provides three cogent ar...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, look, regarding, second, so, third, thus, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1892.0 1373.03311258 138% => OK
No of words: 371.0 270.72406181 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09973045822 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71955870272 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.463611859838 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 564.3 419.366225166 135% => 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: 15.0 8.23620309051 182% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.5796614368 49.2860985944 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.111111111 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6111111111 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05555555556 7.06452816374 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.156382278825 0.272083759551 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0558337871472 0.0996497079465 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.079808321638 0.0662205650399 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.089193895389 0.162205337803 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0514714132145 0.0443174109184 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.