The reading and the listening discuss one of Rembrandt’s painting. The reading presents his point of view that the painting did not belong to him. However, the lecturer presents her alternative argument saying that the original painting belonged to Rembrandt .
Firstly, the reading states that Rembrandt is known from his style and there are problems with the painting such as inconsistency about the woman in the portrait is dressed. In addition, a white linen cap she is wearing is an ordinary item which servants would wear. On the other hand, a fur collar on the coat is a luxury item that cannot be affordable by servants. Rembrandt is known for his details and there is no such an inconsistency in his paintings. The lecturer indicates that after many x-rays and pigment analyses researches realized that fur collar was not part of the original painting. It would added after 100 years later to increase the price of painting.
Secondly, the reading cites that Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow but in this painting the face should appear partially in shadow but it doesn’t how it should be. Furthermore, below the face is the dark fur collar which absorb the light not reflect it. Rembrandt would never have such a mistake. On the other hand, the listening indicates that in the original painting there wasn’t such an error. The dark fur collar added onto the original painting. In the original painting it has simple light colour clothing.
Thirdly, the painting was painted on a panel which made of several pieces of wood glued together. Rembrandt never uses a panel glued together. The lecture believes that like a fur collar these pieces added to the original painting to make more grant and valuable. The original one has one piece of wood.
To sum up, the reading states Rembrandt’s painting was not made by him because of the items which were in the painting, his light and shadow style and the several pieces of wood panel. On the other hand, the lecturer agrees with the reading that these inconsistencies did not belong to Rembrandt because these details added later on the original painting.
Essay topics
Votes
Essay reference notes: This topic is refereed from another essay topic, developed by user: IndiaDreamTrue
Essay Categories
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 264, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... original painting belonged to Rembrandt . Firstly, the reading states that Rembr...
^^
Line 2, column 285, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... servants would wear. On the other hand, a fur collar on the coat is a luxury ite...
^^
Line 2, column 406, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... Rembrandt is known for his details and there is no such an inconsistency in his...
^^
Line 2, column 611, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'add'
Suggestion: add
...part of the original painting. It would added after 100 years later to increase the p...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 106, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ng light and shadow but in this painting the face should appear partially in shad...
^^
Line 4, column 267, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing to make more grant and valuable. The original one has one piece of wood. To ...
^^
Line 5, column 125, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of the items which were in the painting, his light and shadow style and the sever...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, in addition, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => 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: 1792.0 1373.03311258 131% => OK
No of words: 362.0 270.72406181 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95027624309 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.04702891845 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64627187208 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.42817679558 0.540411800872 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 540.0 419.366225166 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.23620309051 182% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.9611390618 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.3333333333 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2380952381 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2380952381 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.568216675518 0.272083759551 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.179903496536 0.0996497079465 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107160157266 0.0662205650399 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.341096114601 0.162205337803 210% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0819579042952 0.0443174109184 185% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.13 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.27 8.42419426049 86% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.