nnnnnn
The purpose of the reading is to prove that some of the Rembrandt's painting are not painted by him. For that, author doubts by giving three views on it. But the lecturer in the listening says that the painting known as 'Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet' was originally painted by Rembrandt and refutes all the claims.
To begin with, the author claims that the inconsistency in the dressing of the woman in the portrait (which is no the Rembrandt way of painting) reveals that it was not painted by him. The professor argues that the fur color was not the part of the painting but it was added later just because to increase it value.
Secondly, the writer says that Rembrandt 'a master of painting light and shadow' could could not do mistakes by illuminating the face. The lecturer refutes this claim by saying that the actual painting has simple and light color.
Thirdly, The author explains that it was painted on a panel made by various wood glued together but Rembrandt used to use single wood for painting. For this reason, he claims that 'Portrait of an Elderly Woman in White Bonnet' is not his original work. The professor argues that the original painting was done in a single wood but is has been done so to add his value by enlarging it.
To summarize, both the writer and the lecturer have contrary views on painting made by Rembrandt. It's clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on this issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 45, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...purpose of the reading is to prove that some of the Rembrandts painting are not painted by ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 111, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...g of the woman in the portrait which is no the Rembrandt way of painting reveals t...
^^
Line 2, column 308, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'values'?
Suggestion: values
...added later just because to increase it value. Secondly, the writer says that Rembra...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 80, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: could
...t a master of painting light and shadow could could not do mistakes by illuminating the fac...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1179.0 1373.03311258 86% => OK
No of words: 257.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.58754863813 5.08290768461 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33184009655 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.470817120623 0.540411800872 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 348.3 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.3452361978 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.25 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4166666667 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 7.06452816374 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => 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: 0.0 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: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 53.8541721854 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.34 12.2367328918 76% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.14 8.42419426049 85% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 63.6247240618 63% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.