Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. How¬ever, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actu¬ally painted by him. One such painting is known as Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet. The painting was attributed to Rembrandt because of its style, and indeed the representation of the woman's face is very much like that of portraits known to be by Rembrandt. But there are problems with the painting that suggest it could not be a work by Rembrandt. First, there is something inconsistent about the way the woman in the portrait is dressed. She is wearing a white linen cap of a kind that only servants would wear— yet the coat she is wearing has a luxurious fur collar that no servant could afford. Rembrandt, who was known for his attention to the details of his subjects' clothing, would not have been guilty of such an inconsistency. Second, Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow, but in this paint¬ing these elements do not fit together. The face appears to be illuminated by light reflected onto it from below. But below the face is the dark fur collar, which would absorb light rather than reflect it. So the face should appear partially in shadow一 which is not how it appears. Rembrandt would never have made such an error. Finally, examination of the back of the painting reveals that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. Although Rembrandt often painted on wood panels, no painting known to be by Rembrandt uses a panel glued together in this way from several pieces of wood. For these reasons the painting was removed from the official catalog of Rem¬brandt's paintings in the 1930s.
The reading states that there are problems with the painting of women that suggest it could not be a work by Rembrandt and provides three reasons of support. The professor explains that the painting is indeed a work done by Rembrandt and refutes each of author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that the dressing of woman in portrait is inconsistent. The professor opposes this point by saying that the fur collar depicted is not from the original painting. Infact, it is added after about 100 years after the original painting was painted. She thinks that some one might have painted the fur collar to enhance the value of the painting.
Second, the reading posits that the elements of light and shadow of the face painting does not fit together. However, the professor contends that the beneath the newly added fur collar which is dark, the original collar was indeed light colored cloth which clearly illustrates the painting's light reflection from below is done by light colored fur collar. This states that the light and shadow of the original painting are realistic and matched with attributed style of Rembrandt.
Third, the reading avers that the painting is made up of several wood pieces which are glued. The professor refutes this point by explaining that the original painting consisted of single wood piece on which picture was painted. The professor states that the glued wooden pieces are later additions done to enhance the painting. Rembrandt often painted on singular wood panels and the paintings wood came from same tree used in on of the other Rembrandt's works.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 288, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'someone'?
Suggestion: someone
...l painting was painted. She thinks that some one might have painted the fur collar to en...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 146, Rule ID: THE_EXACTLY_THE[1]
Message: Duplicated 'the' in the phrase: 'the beneath the'. Did you mean 'beneath the'?
Suggestion: beneath the
...r. However, the professor contends that the beneath the newly added fur collar which is dark, t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 454, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... tree used in on of the other Rembrandts works.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1324.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 265.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99622641509 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.34787346123 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 145.348785872 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.471698113208 0.540411800872 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 385.2 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.8161657254 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.846153846 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3846153846 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.92307692308 7.06452816374 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219377872194 0.272083759551 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0915452876628 0.0996497079465 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0601552268838 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144227453768 0.162205337803 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0229904955639 0.0443174109184 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.61 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 63.6247240618 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.