The presented pie charts compare the expenses of Japanese and Malaysian people in five household categories in 2010. As can be seen from the given illustration, housing in Malaysia required just over one-third of the total cost while transportation in Japan demanded exactly the double cost than that in Malaysia on an average.
As is evident from the given diagrams, food expenditure in Malaysia (27%) was slightly higher than that of Japan (24%). Different goods and services required the highest expenditure for Japanese while it was food that cost the Malaysian the most. Heath care drained 6% money for an average Japanese which was exactly double than the cost in Malaysia. However, just over one-third of the money in Malaysia went on housing while it was just over one-fifth in Japan. Malaysian people spent 26% of their total cost for different service and goods which was 3% lower than that of Japan.
In summary, shelter, food and different commodities and service drained a lion share of a Malaysian’s earning while Japanese people spent more on products and service, foods, transport and housing in 2010. Finally, Japanese people had to spend more on medical services than that of Malaysians.
- The diagram below shows the manufacturing process for making sugar from sugar cane 78
- we are becoming increasingly dependent on computer based technology How do you think it will change in the future is it good for us to reply so much on computers 84
- The table below gives information on consumer spending on different items in five different countries in 2002. 61
- The table below describes the percentages of home schooled students in SomeCountry in 1999 2004 67
- Smoking not only harms the smoker but also those who are nearby Therefore smoking should be banned in public places To what extent do you agree or disagree 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, third, while, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 33.7804878049 86% => 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: 1012.0 965.302439024 105% => OK
No of words: 198.0 196.424390244 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11111111111 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.75116612262 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63524106291 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.484848484848 0.547539520022 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 309.6 283.868780488 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => 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: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.87046456 43.030603864 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.444444444 112.824112599 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 22.9334400587 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.11111111111 5.23603664747 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176105293329 0.215688989381 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0826553761065 0.103423049105 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0740565563719 0.0843802449381 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124370168797 0.15604864568 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0832412905044 0.0819641961636 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.2329268293 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 61.2550243902 80% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 11.4140731707 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.