Telephone conversations in Finland
The bar chat illustrates the amount of minutes (in millions) of telephone conversations in Finland, separated into three types, from 1995-2004. In all years local landline minutes was higher than other two. In Finland Mobile usage was very less when comparing to the other telephone conversation ways.
Furthermore, in 1995 to 2001 there was a increase in Local- landline up to 17000 in millions, but from 2001 to 2004 there was a decreasing trend. The least figure was 6000 in millions in National and international –landlines while the highest figure was 10500 in millions in 2004.
There was a dramatic increase in mobile calls from 250 to 9800 million minutes. This rise was particularly noticeable between 2000 and 2004, during which time the use of mobile phones tripled.
To sum up, although local landline calls were still the most popular in 2004, the gap between three categories had narrowed considerately over the second half of the period in the graph.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-09-04 | Sanaullah97 | view | |
| 2020-03-31 | aida-pa | 100 | view |
| 2014-01-08 | friday10042 | 84 | view |
| 2013-12-09 | munimuni | 56 | view |
| 2013-12-02 | onia | 83 | view |
- Telephone conversations in Finland 80
- In many countries schools have severe problems with student behaviour What do you think are the causes of this What solutions can you suggest 76
- Some people think that travel helps gaining knowledge but others think that TV and internet play an important role in gaining knowledge Discuss both views and give your own opinion 66
- Today’s teaching methods and communication between teachers and students will disappear by the year 2050. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 63
- waste recycling rates in the U.S. from 1960 to 2011 73
Sentence: In all years local landline minutes was higher than other two.
Description: The fragment local landline minutes is not usually followed by was
Suggestion: Possible agreement error: Replace was with were
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 6.5 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 10
No. of Words: 160 200
No. of Characters: 784 1000
No. of Different Words: 97 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.557 4.0
Average Word Length: 4.9 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.66 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 51 60
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 40 50
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 29 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 16 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.557 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.375 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.413 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.719 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.053 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4