Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him. One such painting is known as attributed to Rembrandt because of its style, and indeed the representation of the woman’s face is very much like that of portraits known to be by Rembrandt. But there are problems with the painting that suggest it could not be a work by Rembrandt.
First, there is something inconsistent about the way the woman in the portrait is dressed. She is wearing a white linen cap of a kind that only servants would wear-yet the coat she is wearing has a luxurious fur collar that no servant could afford. Rembrandt, who was known for his attention to the details of his subjects’ clothing, would not have been guilty of such an inconsistency.
Second, Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow, but in this painting these elements do not fit together. The face appears to be illuminated by light reflected onto it from below. But below the face is the dark fur collar, which would absorb light rather than reflect it. So the face should appear partially in shadow-which is not how it appears. Rembrandt would never have made such an error.
Finally, examination of the back of the painting reveals that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. Although Rembrandt often painted on wood panels, no painting known to be by Rembrandt uses a panel glued together in this way from several pieces of wood.
The reading passage states three reasons for removing a Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet from Rembrandt's paintings. However, the lecture has an opposite opinion.
First, the reading passage states that painting is not consistent in its style, as it usual in Rembrant's painting. As shown in the painting the woman wears a white linen cap which belong to the servants, that contradicts with a opulent coat. Yet, the lecture refutes the reading passage by arguing that inconsistence because the original painting was stained by a pigment that changed the original colors of the portrait.
Second, as the writer says that portrait doesn't use the light and shadow as Rembrant used to illuminate the face. But, in this portrait the painter draw a dark fur under the face which dark the face. Although, the speaker denies the wrtier's statement by mentioning that the original protrait has a simple colors clothes that reflect the light and lighten the face.
Finally, the author mentions that the portrait was painted on a wood panal made of pieces glued together. Notwithstanding, the lecturer opposes the reading passage by pointing out that original portrait was made from a single piece of wood, and it is similar to the other Rembrant's painting. Yet, as the speaker adds, that small wood pieces were added to add value to the original portrait. Therefore, based on the speaker explanation to inconsistence in the portrait, removing it form the Rembrant's painting is not the correct action.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 227, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... to the servants, that contradicts with a opulent coat. Yet, the lecture refutes ...
^
Line 5, column 42, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...econd, as the writer says that portrait doesnt use the light and shadow as Rembrant us...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 333, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...has a simple colors clothes that reflect the light and lighten the face. Final...
^^
Line 7, column 482, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'forms'?
Suggestion: forms
...onsistence in the portrait, removing it form the Rembrants painting is not the corre...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, second, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1262.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 249.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06827309237 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63197789202 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 145.348785872 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5140562249 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 374.4 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => 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: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.5962001584 49.2860985944 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.166666667 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.75 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.25 7.06452816374 60% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.112802675757 0.272083759551 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0444707399875 0.0996497079465 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0417682580676 0.0662205650399 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0675626106793 0.162205337803 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0491988907991 0.0443174109184 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => 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: 12.13 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.