The reading passage discusses an interesting topic about the authenticity of a Jane Austen's painting, and provides extensive information and reasons for support. However, the lecture casts doubts on the painting. He believes that there is not enough evidences for this claims, and moreover, it could represents another person.
First of all, the reading passage states that the use of the illustration by the family, was a clear sign of the recognition that the portrait was Jan Austen. On the opposite, the lecture explains that the family gave the permission to use the painting seventy years after Jane passed away. Consequently, the family members that gave that permission, never saw Jane in person and they could never be sure that the woman in the portrait was really Jane.
Secondly, the reading passage suggests the portrait could represent Jane Austen because it resembles the one of Cassandra'sketch. Challenging this idea, the lecture contradicts this argument pointing out that the resemble could be because it is, in fact, the painting of a close relative. According to the lecturer, there is also a claim that points to a niece of Jane Austen as the object of the painting.
Finally, according to the reading passage the style of the painting connects to Ozias Humphrey, a painter hired by Austen family during 1780, early 1790. On the contrary, the lecture, challenges this evidence by explaining that the canvas used to paint the portrait was sold in London after that date and to late for a young Jane be portrayed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 265, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
... that there is not enough evidences for this claims, and moreover, it could represen...
^^^^
Line 1, column 301, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'represent'
Suggestion: represent
...for this claims, and moreover, it could represents another person. First of all, the re...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 209, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...radicts this argument pointing out that the resemble could be because it is, in fact, the pa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, finally, first, however, moreover, really, second, secondly, so, then, in fact, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1288.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07086614173 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71903342868 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527559055118 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 394.2 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.2173886427 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.090909091 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0909090909 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.7272727273 7.06452816374 166% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => 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: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.357118816815 0.272083759551 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136774553242 0.0996497079465 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0804170583296 0.0662205650399 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.224081563525 0.162205337803 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0498468207476 0.0443174109184 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25 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.