The lecture talks about the positive result of a research made by a panel of experts, concerning the authenticity of a presumed Rembrandt painting. The author of the passage, however disagrees with this idea.
First, the author questions the woman's clothing, especially an expensive fur collar that is not in alignment with the respective person's social status. This argument is refuted by the lecturer, by arguing that the collar is not a part of the original painting. According to the x-rays analysis, the painting was modified during a restoration process, in order to add some value. Thus, the results contradicts the passage directly.
Second, the author contends that the light and shadow reflected by the fur collar, seem not to belong to the painter's style. The lecturer, however, explains that this alteration was also produced by the rehabilitation. Initially, in the original painting, the woman was wearing a piece of a white cloth and the light was reflected suitably for Rembrandt's realistic style. This was another aspect that contradicted the passage.
Third, the lecturer mentions that the original painting had only one single piece of wood. It is assumed that the rest of the pieces were subsequently added for giving the impression of a monumental piece of art. The tests has also showed that Rembrandt used this kind of wood, for other masterpieces he created. This point does not totally contradicts the idea of the article, but it shows that the other wooden parts were following added. All in all the lecturer asserts that there are enough reasons to prove that the painting belongs to Rembrandt, whereas the author argues its authenticity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 224, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'have', 'haven'.
Suggestion: have; haven
...of a monumental piece of art. The tests has also showed that Rembrandt used this ki...
^^^
Line 7, column 342, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'contradict'
Suggestion: contradict
...he created. This point does not totally contradicts the idea of the article, but it shows t...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, then, third, thus, whereas, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1403.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15808823529 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74629892106 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5625 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 426.6 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.9958167361 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.5333333333 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1333333333 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 7.06452816374 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.296819528301 0.272083759551 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0850915044817 0.0996497079465 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607289703738 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16168667677 0.162205337803 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0529963548067 0.0443174109184 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.12 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.