The article states that the painting could not be a work of Rembrandt and provides three reasons to support his claim. However, the professor of the lecture explains that experts found the painting is made by Rembrandt and refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading states that the women in the portrait is dressed inconsistently. The professor refutes this point by stating that the color is not original as it was repainted by someone else. The professor explains the reason behind repainting as to increase the value of the painting.
Second, the article claims that as a master of light and shadow, his painting elements do not fit together. However, the professor contends that originally the portrait was a simple light color and the face did not appear partially in shadow. Moreover, the original painting would look like a normal painting of Rembrandt.
Third, the reading avers that the painting was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. The lecture opposes this point by saying that to make it more valuable somebody added some wood frame. The lecture also states that the original panel of the painting and other panels of Rembrandt painting is from the same tree.
In conclusion, although the reading and the lecture are both about the originality of work done by Rembrandt, the three main points made in the reading are effectively challenged by the lecturer.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, look, moreover, second, so, third, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => 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: 1194.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 237.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03797468354 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92362132708 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6006283846 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 117.0 145.348785872 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.493670886076 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 359.1 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.0567749804 49.2860985944 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.5 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.75 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.06452816374 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.232598599998 0.272083759551 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0944352089829 0.0996497079465 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0903500465693 0.0662205650399 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.133012831748 0.162205337803 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0884593699263 0.0443174109184 200% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.78 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 63.6247240618 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.