The pie charts below show the average household expenditures from Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010.
The pie chart s below illustrate the comparisons average household expenditures from Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010.
Overall, it can be seen that percentage housing which had a prominent difference of that year in every country. There in Malaysia the housing has had highest percentage had the diverge 13% smaller than Japan in 2010. However, in Japan the health care stood at 29% marked at contrast 3% with Malaysia. similar pattern as well as food and other goods services all country . Which only had a slight difference. But , the health care fell to a low of only 3%. Though unlike, the transport second highest increased in Japan to approximately 20%. The food in japan which was the lowest of that year. Only 24% whilst Malaysia. The transport at Malaysia marked at half smaller than Japan stood at 10%. The other goods and services get 29% most effects from other in Japan.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-20 | Chayacp | 56 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | Jesslynindah | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | thanhthanh211 | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-15 | Zulph_ | 84 | view |
| 2019-12-11 | faraj27 | 73 | view |
- The pie charts below show the average household expenditures from Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010. 61
- The line graph compares the production of energy from coal in Sweden France Denmark and Germany between 1995 and 2010 32
- The chart below show the percentage of female and male teachers in six different types of educational setting in UK in 2010. 84
- In some countries, young people are encouraged to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university studies.Discuss the advantage and disadvantage for young people who decide to do this 61
- The chart below shoes the percentage of male and female teachers in six different types of educational setting in the UK in 2010. 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 48, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
..., it can be seen that percentage housing which had a prominent difference of that...
^^
Line 2, column 147, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'had the highest'.
Suggestion: had the highest
...ntry. There in Malaysia the housing has had highest percentage had the diverge 13% smaller ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 174, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... housing has had highest percentage had the diverge 13% smaller than Japan in 2010. However...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 302, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Similar
...9% marked at contrast 3% with Malaysia. similar pattern as well as food and other goods...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 370, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ood and other goods services all country . Which only had a slight difference. But...
^^
Line 2, column 373, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... and other goods services all country . Which only had a slight difference. But , the...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 412, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... Which only had a slight difference. But , the health care fell to a low of only 3...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, second, so, well, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 33.7804878049 65% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 736.0 965.302439024 76% => OK
No of words: 153.0 196.424390244 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81045751634 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.51700396316 3.73543355544 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51841087598 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 89.0 106.607317073 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.581699346405 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 214.2 283.868780488 75% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 12.0 22.4926829268 53% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.7083030963 43.030603864 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 61.3333333333 112.824112599 54% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 12.75 22.9334400587 56% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 3.83333333333 5.23603664747 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 3.83414634146 52% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 7.0 1.69756097561 412% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.339066250642 0.215688989381 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123497160298 0.103423049105 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.205880878296 0.0843802449381 244% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.478081590994 0.15604864568 306% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.31169307264 0.0819641961636 380% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.6 13.2329268293 57% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 76.22 61.2550243902 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 5.6 10.3012195122 54% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 9.73 11.4140731707 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.53 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 40.7170731707 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 6.8 10.9970731707 62% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.0658536585 63% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.