TPO INTEGATED 3
The lecture revises the idea presented in the text, that Rembrandt was not the artist who painted the famous painting "Portrait of an Elderly woman in a white Bonnet".
The inconsistency between the white cap, which identifies the woman as a servant, and the expensive fur collar she wears dissolves as the Professor explains that the fur collar was apparently painted over the original painting to increase its worth by displaying an aristocratic woman.
In addition, the assumption that light and shadow in the painting do not fit together is refuted by the fact that in the original painting, the woman worn a light cloth that illuminated her face. Thus the presentation of light and shadow was indeed very realistic and accurate, as it is characteristic of Rembrandt's paintings.
Finally, the mystery of the panel consisting of patches glued together is also solved in the lecture. Actually, the wood panel was later enlarged to make it more grand and valuable, but the original painting was painted on a single panel, as Rembrandt would have done it. Furthermore, the wood is of the same tree used in other Rembrandt paintings, like the "Self-Portrait with a Hat". All this information points to Rembrandt as the painter of the controversial painting.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...Elderly woman in a white Bonnet'. The inconsistency between the white cap,...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...h by displaying an aristocratic woman. In addition, the assumption that light a...
^^
Line 3, column 198, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... light cloth that illuminated her face. Thus the presentation of light and shadow wa...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...haracteristic of Rembrandts paintings. Finally, the mystery of the panel consis...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, apparently, but, finally, furthermore, if, so, thus, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1085.0 1373.03311258 79% => OK
No of words: 211.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14218009479 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81127787577 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11402900007 2.5805825403 121% => OK
Unique words: 120.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.568720379147 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 326.7 419.366225166 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.5201412754 49.2860985944 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.625 110.228320801 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.375 21.698381199 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06452816374 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.0 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: 16.0 13.3589403974 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.5 10.7273730684 182% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.