The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in millions) of telephone calls in Finland, divided into three categories, from 1995 – 2004.
The given chart illustrates how many minutes of telephone calls there were Finland in terms of local-landline, national and international-landline, and mobiles over the course of 9 years starting from 1995.
Looking at the report, it is immediately obvious that in 9 years, there was a decided upward trend in the number of minutes of mobiles and national and international–landline calls, while local-landline calls saw the same tendency from 1995 to 2001, then fell minimally in 2004. However, local-landline calls were the largest throughout the period.
As can be seen from the chart, there were 12000 million minutes of local-landline calls, which was the highest in 1995, followed by national and international-landline calls with 6000 million minutes. In the same year, mobiles were hardly used. Nevertheless, after 6 years, there was a significant increase to nearly 6000 million in the quantity of minutes of mobiles calls. Similarly, local-landline and national and international calls experienced a considerable rise to 15000 and 9000 million minutes respectively in 2001.
Then, in the next 5 years, local-landline calls fell marginally to 12000 million minutes, while the figure of minutes of mobiles and national and international calls continued to go up to 10000 and 11000 million in turn in 2004.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-11 | alifdores | 78 | view |
| 2018-06-11 | minhchau2205 | 61 | view |
| 2018-06-11 | minhchau2205 | 61 | view |
| 2017-02-03 | Trangnguyen95 | 73 | view |
| 2017-02-03 | Trangnguyen95 | 73 | view |
- University should accept equal number of male and female students in every subject. Do you agree or disagree? 73
- The pie charts below give information about world population in 1900 and 200 61
- The chart below shows the total number of minutes in millions of telephone calls in Finland divided into three categories from 1995 2004 87
- The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in millions) of telephone calls in Finland, divided into three categories, from 1995 – 2004. 61
- The table below shows the average band scores for students from different language groups taking the IELTS General Test in 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, look, nevertheless, similarly, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 6.8 162% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1120.0 965.302439024 116% => OK
No of words: 205.0 196.424390244 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46341463415 4.92477711251 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.78388967377 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.69798568897 2.65546596893 139% => OK
Unique words: 108.0 106.607317073 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526829268293 0.547539520022 96% => OK
syllable_count: 328.5 283.868780488 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.07073170732 374% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.5751902082 43.030603864 176% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.0 112.824112599 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.625 22.9334400587 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.875 5.23603664747 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 0.24153204754 0.215688989381 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115764288373 0.103423049105 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.06803745272 0.0843802449381 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170336014603 0.15604864568 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0245826711578 0.0819641961636 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 13.2329268293 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 61.2550243902 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.3012195122 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 11.4140731707 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.06136585366 97% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.4329268293 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.0658536585 136% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.