Reading and Lecture are debating whether Rembrandt was the original artist of a particular painting. The reading provides several inconsistency in the painting to attribute the painting as duplicate one however, the professor also provides different proof to refutes the position of the reading.
First of all, the professor presents the result of X-ray analysis to support that the fur collar was not orinally part of the painting. About 100 years ago, people might have painted this on top of original painting to increase it's value. So it is indeed the original painting and conforms to artist painting style.
Second, the reading states that ligting combination of the painting does not match it with property of Rembrandt's painting. However, the professor says after removing the extra paiting from the original paiting the light shadow combination was perfect in the original paiting. The face of the women was brighter as it should be in the original art.
Finally, The professor presents that Researcher have found that without the addition of the extra collar the remaining part of the painting was drawn on a single wood and it is the same wood that Rembrandt's painted his own portrait on. This evidence support the professor cause that the painting is indeed an original one.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 123, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun inconsistency seems to be countable; consider using: 'several inconsistencies'.
Suggestion: several inconsistencies
...rticular painting. The reading provides several inconsistency in the painting to attribute the painti...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 77, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing combination of the painting does not match it with property of Rembrandts pai...
^^
Line 5, column 314, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...ing. The face of the women was brighter as it should be in the original art. Fi...
^^
Line 7, column 306, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...fessor cause that the painting is indeed an original one.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, first of all
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 : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1085.0 1373.03311258 79% => OK
No of words: 211.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14218009479 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81127787577 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57445015984 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 109.0 145.348785872 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.516587677725 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 329.4 419.366225166 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 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: 50.5355320542 49.2860985944 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.5 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4 7.06452816374 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 4.45695364238 0% => 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: 0.26794314117 0.272083759551 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113249118761 0.0996497079465 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.076866485697 0.0662205650399 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176035239449 0.162205337803 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0544651748557 0.0443174109184 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 63.6247240618 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.