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.
For these reasons the painting was removed from the official catalog of Rembrandt’s paintings in the 1930s.
The reading and the lecture are both about Rembrandt's certain painting. The article introduces the topic of whether the painting was drawn by Rembrandt or not. More specifically, the writer discusses the reasons for his claim that the painter's common style is not in that certain art. The lecturer in the listening passage disagrees. She believes that after a thorough examination, the researchers proved that it was indeed Rembrandt's painting. In the reading, the author begins by stating that the woman's clothing is not of servant's because the way she wore luxury fur is doubtful. The lecturer, however, disagrees with this viewpoint. She states that the experts did an x-ray analysis of the original art. She goes on to say that the fur collar is not part of the original painting. The author also claims that by seeing the painting, it is doubtful that Rembrandt is an expert at using light and shadow. Again, the lecturer believes there are flaws in the writer's argument. The speaker holds that his original painting did not include fur color. She supports this by saying that the light color illuminated the face, not darken it. Another reason why the author feels this way is the way the painter used glued wood. The writer states that this is not how Rembrandt's style is. The professor in the listening passage is doubtful that this is accurate. She suggests that the wood panel is used to enlarge, to add a more grand approach. Also, the painter used this style for his other painting that illustrates a self-portrait with a hat. To sum up, both the writer and professor hold different views about Rembrandt's art.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 960, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ecturer believes there are flaws in the writers argument. The speaker holds that his or...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1346.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 277.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85920577617 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52318421345 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501805054152 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 396.9 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => 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: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 23.5982064204 49.2860985944 48% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 70.8421052632 110.228320801 64% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.5789473684 21.698381199 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.68421052632 7.06452816374 24% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 1.0 4.09492273731 24% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.179151664845 0.272083759551 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0557158802649 0.0996497079465 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059359508112 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179151664845 0.162205337803 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.8 13.3589403974 66% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 74.19 53.8541721854 138% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 11.0289183223 58% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.32 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted. The correct pattern:
para 1: introduction
para 2: doubt 1
para 3: doubt 2
para 4: doubt 3
Less contents wanted from the reading passages(25%), more content wanted from the lecture (75%).
Don't need a conclusion paragraph.
Read sample essays from ETS:
http://www.testbig.com/users/toeflwritingmaster
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.