The article states that there are some problems with the women portrait that suggest it couldn’t be a work by Rembrandt and gives three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that the portrait was painted by Rembrandt indeed and he refutes of each of the authors reasons.
First, the reading claims that there is something inconsistent about the ugly dressing way of the woman in the portrait and Rembrandt was known by his attention to every detail in any subject. But the professor refutes this point by saying that fair color was a part of the original painting and thus increases the painting value.
Second, the reading posits that Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow, but in this portrait these elements do not fit together and the face appears to be illuminated by light reflected onto it from below. Moreover, below the face is the dark fur collar, which would absorb light rather than reflect it. However, the professor says that there are nice effect of light and shadow and the light color cove, the face not in the portrait shadow.
Third, the reading argued that painting shows that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. But the professor opposes this point by explaining that wood panel was also enlarging to make painting more value. So, From the professor explanations we ensures that the painting was made by Rembrandt
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 278, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'we' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'ensure'
Suggestion: ensure
... So, From the professor explanations we ensures that the painting was made by Rembrandt...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 325, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... that the painting was made by Rembrandt
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, moreover, second, so, third, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => 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: 1170.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 240.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.875 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93597934253 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42038507037 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 145.348785872 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.520833333333 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 343.8 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.8247343842 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.0 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06452816374 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.572557547202 0.272083759551 210% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.229755413694 0.0996497079465 231% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0923136609855 0.0662205650399 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.336038157435 0.162205337803 207% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0562245018323 0.0443174109184 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 53.8541721854 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 63.6247240618 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.