The reading and the listening passages are both about Rembrandt, who is a famous Dutch painter. While the reading passage suggests three reasons that one painting could not be a work by Rembrandt, the lecturer contends that it is done by him.
First of all, the author of the reading claims that there is something inconsistent about the drawing that Rembrandt who was known for his attention would not have been done this problem. The professor, however, says that after they examine the painting with X-ray they found that fur color was not the original. Someone changed the colors to increase its value.
Secondly, the writer states that Rembrandt would never have made an error with his painting and in this painting, there is an issue with light and shadow, which it does not fit together. The professor cast doubt on this point by saying the original appeared to be fit. After they modified they fur colors it changed.
Finally, the reading passage mentions that the painted was painted in a panel of several pieces of wood glutted together, which Rembrandt did not use. The lecturer, on the other hands, explains that the painting was enlarged after the fur colors in order to increase the cost. Also, she adds that the original was a single wood.
To conclude, the lecturer debunks all the points that were made in the reading.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 270, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “After” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...saying the original appeared to be fit. After they modified they fur colors it change...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 318, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ey modified they fur colors it changed. Finally, the reading passage mentions th...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, while, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1120.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 230.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86956521739 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89432290496 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.28794820622 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 145.348785872 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.55652173913 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 323.1 419.366225166 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.4939858814 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.3333333333 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1666666667 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.91666666667 7.06452816374 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.448903160903 0.272083759551 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.146591383166 0.0996497079465 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.115658996531 0.0662205650399 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.226312916496 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106191897648 0.0443174109184 240% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 53.8541721854 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 11.0289183223 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 63.6247240618 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.