rembrandt painting
The lecturer, as well as the reading, are about a painting that was created by Rembrandt. The reading states that this painting was not painted by Rembrandt because there is some inconsistency with the style of this painting. In contrast to the reading, the professor suggests that Remabrant actually paints the painting. The lecturer supports her argument by providing three reasons.
First of all, the reading claim that the woman in the portrait is wearing some stuff that only could be used by servant. However, the professor refutes this point. She says that the fur collar was painted after the original paint was made. Furthermore, She points out that it was done to get a more valuable painting.
Second, according to the reading, the woman’s face appears to be illuminated, and it is a mistake that Rembrandt could not was made. Nevertheless, the lecturer disputes this argument. She argues that as the fur collar was put after the original painting was made, it did that this painting had this light reflect. In addition, she mentions that the painting had other pigments, which make it shiny.
Finally, the reading states that the last examination reveals that it was painted on a panel with many pieces of wood. Nonetheless, the lecturer believes that it was provoked when people change the original painting. Moreover, she thinks that it was made to enlarge this painting and obtain a more valuable painting.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-02 | nusybah | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-06 | YasamanEsml | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-06 | YasamanEsml | 70 | view |
| 2023-04-23 | Yam Kumar Oli | 70 | view |
| 2023-02-24 | Muggle | 80 | view |
- torreya plant 73
- Most people accept that we now live in a globalised world but not everyone agrees that this is beneficial To what extent is globalisation a positive or negative development 56
- The graph shows the percentage of male and female academic staff members across the faculties of a major university in 2012 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Altruism 76
- It is more important to keep your old friends than it is to make new friends 60
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, furthermore, however, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, so, well, in addition, in contrast, as well as, first of all, in contrast to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 22.412803532 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1199.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 237.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.05907172996 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92362132708 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62572724293 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 120.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.506329113924 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 351.0 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.8454887673 49.2860985944 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 79.9333333333 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.2666666667 7.06452816374 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.325307249134 0.272083759551 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120144269879 0.0996497079465 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.126293738666 0.0662205650399 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.230175162594 0.162205337803 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126787545048 0.0443174109184 286% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 13.3589403974 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.77 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.