The passage explores the issue of some doubts about a painting that used to be thought painted by Rembrandt. The professor's lecture deals with the same one. However, she thinks that it is proved by examinations that this pointing is indeed attributed to Rembrandt although the three confusions are true. And in her lecture, she uses three specific points and elaborated details to support her idea.
First of all, the reading passages states that the fur collar is too luxury for a servant to afford so that this point cannot be created by Rembrandt since he is an expert in details of his subjects' clothing. On the contrary, the professor argues in the lecture that according to an analysis, the luxurious fur collar was an addition to this painting hundreds of years after. This is because someone else wanted to raise the value and make the lady decorated more formally. Obviously, the professor's argument disproves its counterpart in the reading.
Moreover, despite the statement in the reading passage that an error of light and shadow which Rembrandt would never have made; the professor contends that this confusion is also caused by the additional part. Then she supports this point with the fact that covered by the surface part, in the original part of this painting, there is a lady dressed simply clothes. The original part is successfully absorbed light than the fur collar. Also, this realistic style is typical of Rembrandt.
Finally, the professor asserts that the original panel is made of a single wood and whether the panel is made of a single or several pieces of wood cannot prove that Rembrandt created this painting. But in the passage, the author addresses that the painting panel material is glued wood so that it cannot be Rembrandt's creature. The professor proves that this claim is indefensible by pointing out that the panel of Rembrandt’s self-portrait with a hat is made of several pieces of wood glued together.
To sum up, the professor clearly identifies three weaknesses in the reading passage, and convincingly shows that the central argument in the reading, that a famous painting once attributed to Rembrandt is not pointed by him, is incorrect.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 490, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...decorated more formally. Obviously, the professors argument disproves its counterpart in t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, so, then, first of all, on the contrary, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 22.412803532 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 30.3222958057 162% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1835.0 1373.03311258 134% => OK
No of words: 365.0 270.72406181 135% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02739726027 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66269235335 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506849315068 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 550.8 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6247334749 49.2860985944 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.6875 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8125 21.698381199 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
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: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
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: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 63.6247240618 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.