The author of the passage mainly talks about one painting attributed to Rembrandt. He states three prominent reasons as why the painting could not be the work of Rembrandt. However, the speaker casts doubt on these reasons and elaborates how this painting could be the work of Rembrandt.
For the first reason, the passage states that due to the fur collar inconsistency in the portrait, this could not have been work of Rembrandt. Whereas, the speaker states that fur collar wasn't the part of the original painting and that someone drew it almost 100 years after the original painting was drawn.
Additionally, according to the speaker, in the original painting the light and shadow are very realistic like the other works of Rembrandt. On the contrary, the reading explains that the shadow beneath the face is dark which is paradox with the style of Rembrandt in her other paintings.
Finally, the speaker clarifies that wood panel of the original painting is one single wood. She adds that researcher have discovered that this wood is of a tree, which the same painting of the Rembrandt, self-portrait with a hat, has been built of. She mentioned that this extra glued wood has been added to the panel to enlarge it to make it valuable and grand.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 129, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... portrait, this could not have been work of Rembrandt. Whereas, the speaker state...
^^
Line 3, column 189, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...eas, the speaker states that fur collar wasnt the part of the original painting and t...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, so, whereas, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1045.0 1373.03311258 76% => OK
No of words: 214.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88317757009 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53443831796 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 110.0 145.348785872 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.514018691589 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 300.6 419.366225166 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.3506613679 49.2860985944 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 104.5 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292681061622 0.272083759551 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.134046084403 0.0996497079465 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0817929846451 0.0662205650399 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18282362433 0.162205337803 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0874215920199 0.0443174109184 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 53.8541721854 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.19 8.42419426049 85% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 63.6247240618 53% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.