The chart below gives information about how families in one country spent their weekly income in 1968 and 2018.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The bar graph given below demonstrated about how families in one nation wasted their weekly wage in 1968 and in 2018. It was measured by percentage. Overall, food is the highest outcome in 1968 whilst holiday was the biggest in 2018.
Moving to more detailed analysis between 1968 and 2018, food had the most immense spent at 35%. On the other hand, it was a sharp decreased by more than a half in the next four decades. Following this, the second largest number was housing at 10% which rose markedly at 20%. Similarly, both of household and personal goods had the same amount at around 10% in 1968 but nearly 40 years later, individual goods had fell slightly by around 5 whilst household consumption didn’t move.
Moreover on secondary sides, the heftiest amount that used was clothing and footware at 10% in 1968 which decreased steadily half of it in a few years. Next, both of transport and leisure which got more than 5% in 1968. However, leisure growth twice as much as transport in 2018. Last, the tiniest amount and also experienced a slight fall was fuel and power from almost 10% to below 5% along period.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-01 | nhathongk2003 | 84 | view |
- Nowadays most people try to balance between work and other parts of lives Unfortunately not many achieves this balance What are the problems of this Suggest some solutions to solve the problem 84
- The chart below shows the number of passengers who used public transport in Somewhere town from 2012 to 2015
- Nowadays children play less with others and this has an impact on their development What are reasons for this Does it have a good or bad effect on children 89
- The pie charts show the destination of export goods in three countries in 2010
- Student at universities often have a choice of places to live They may choose to live in university dormitories or they may choose to live in apartments in the community Compare the advantages of living in university housing with the advantages of living 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...t household consumption didn’t move. Moreover on secondary sides, the heftiest amount...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, moreover, second, similarly, so, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 928.0 965.302439024 96% => OK
No of words: 198.0 196.424390244 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.68686868687 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.75116612262 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.34978241552 2.65546596893 88% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.616161616162 0.547539520022 113% => OK
syllable_count: 259.2 283.868780488 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.6772725011 43.030603864 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.3636363636 112.824112599 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 22.9334400587 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.36363636364 5.23603664747 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => 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: 0.124190217444 0.215688989381 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0518887682495 0.103423049105 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0772795429977 0.0843802449381 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105070862583 0.15604864568 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.083649809036 0.0819641961636 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.7 13.2329268293 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 78.59 61.2550243902 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 10.3012195122 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.63 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.