The following bar chart shows the different modes of transport used to travel to and from work in one European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000.
The bar chart compares the use of different means of transport in a European city in three different years: 1960, 1980 and 2000.
Overall, it is clear that the proportion of people who commuted to work by bus, bike or walked to work saw a downward trend over the period shown, while the opposite was true for cars.
As can be seen from the chart, walking was chosen by most commuters in 1960, with under 35% of people going to work on foot. By contrast, car was the least preferred mode of transportation in that year, with just over 5% of people traveling by cars. However, while the percentage of people walking to work fell considerably to just under 10% from 1960 to 2000, there was a dramatic growth of 30% in the proportion of commuters travelling by cars over the same period, making it the most common transportation of all in 2000.
Regarding to bus and bike, around 17% and 25% of citizens went to work by bus and bike respectively in 1960. Over the next two decades, while bus became the most widely-used mean of transportation, with over 25% of people went to work by bus, the proportion of commuters cycling to work witnessed a slight decrease of 5%. The period from 1980 to 2000 saw a decline to over 15% and 5% in the percentage of people choosing bus and bike to go to work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 422, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to bus'
Suggestion: to bus
...5% in the percentage of people choosing bus and bike to go to work.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, regarding, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 33.7804878049 186% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1062.0 965.302439024 110% => OK
No of words: 238.0 196.424390244 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.46218487395 4.92477711251 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92775363542 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59252890621 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 106.607317073 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 302.4 283.868780488 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.07073170732 374% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 54.4885309033 43.030603864 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.75 112.824112599 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.75 22.9334400587 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.625 5.23603664747 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More 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: 0.297965809974 0.215688989381 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.154891125454 0.103423049105 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.134065201429 0.0843802449381 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.219285061857 0.15604864568 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.167182546172 0.0819641961636 204% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.2329268293 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 67.42 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.18 11.4140731707 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.4 8.06136585366 92% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.0658536585 136% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.