12.4综合写作 美利坚

shining_sjUID: 2485580

In the lecture,the professor argues that the controversal painting,Portrait of an Elderly Woman was actually attributed to Rembrandt.She provid three convincing explanation to support her arguments,casting mostly doubt on the reasons stated in the passage.

First of all,Fur collar wasn’t the part of the original painting.The reading contends that the dress of the woman in the potrait is not consistent to the woman’s status. And Rembrandt wouldn’t have draw it by mistake,since he was likely to focus on the details.In contrast,the professor consists that the fur collar was painted over the top of the original work 100 years after the painting was drawn in order to increase the value of the painting.

Secondly,the professor claims that the original paiting is the realistic style of Remrandt.which rejects the contents mentioned in the reading that below face of the woman in the work didn’t reflect the light.According to the lecturer,moved away the fur collar,the original painting used the light color which illuminate the light and combine the elements of light and shadow well.

Finally,the evidence is provided that original painting was painted on a single piece of wood,challenging the reading statement that wood glued panel from several pieces of wood was never used by Rembrandt.The professor assumes that when the fur collar was added,the wood panel was also enlarged due to the same reason.Moreover, reserach shows that the panel of the portrait came from the same tree,source of another paiting panel form Rembrandt.

To sum up,all the three evidences of the lecture illustrate that the professor disagree with the points mentioned in the reading materials.

SilentScorpiusUID: 2686998

In the lecture,theprofessor argues that the controversal painting,Portrait of an ElderlyWoman was actually attributed to Rembrandt.She provid three convincingexplanation to support her arguments,casting mostly doubt on thereasons stated in the passage.

First of all,Furcollar wasn’t the part of the original painting.The reading contendsthat the dress of the woman in the potrait is not consistent to(with) thewoman’s status. And Rembrandt wouldn’t have draw it by mistake,since hewas likely to focus on the details.In contrast,the professor consists(argues)that the fur collar was painted over the top of the original work 100years after the painting was drawn in order to increase the value ofthe painting.

Secondly,theprofessor claims that the original paiting is the realistic style ofRemrandt.which rejects the contents mentioned in the reading that belowface of the woman in the work didn’t reflect the light.According to thelecturer,moved away the fur collar,the original painting used the lightcolor which illuminate（还是用reflects） the light and combine the elements of light andshadow well.

Finally,theevidence is provided that original painting was painted on a singlepiece of wood,challenging the reading statement that wood glued panelfrom several pieces of wood was never used by Rembrandt.The professorassumes that when the fur collar was added,the wood panel was alsoenlarged due to the same reason.Moreover, reserach shows that the panelof the portrait came from the same tree,source of another paiting panelform Rembrandt.(这里没看明白)

To sum up,all the three evidences of the lecture illustrate that theprofessor disagree with the points mentioned in the reading materials

结构清晰，论证用到了听力中所有的细节（最后一个我没听明白。。。），相当不错。不过有的用词要注意。