The charts show the percentage of income spent on food and other goods in 3 European countries from 1998 – 2008.
The bar chart illustrates the proportion of money that people in France, Germany and England spent on food and other products in 1998 and 2008.
Looking at the graph, it is immediately obvious that while England and France saw a significant rise in the percentage of purchases of both food and other goods over the examined period, Germans only poured a little more of their income into them.
People in France allocated 15% and roughly 10% of their cash to acquiring foodstuffs and other goods, respectively. After 10 years, the figures for both categories climbed dramatically to a similar number of 40%. Germany was the first place in using 25% of the total money for comestible and about 17% for merchandise in the first time of the survey. However, each German only additionally expended 5% and over 10% for aforesaid items in 2008, sequentially.
In England, buyers paid just 10% for food in 1998 and raised slightly to 15% in 2008. Meanwhile, other products have received a demand boom and have increased seven times in 2008, (35%), compared to the figure ten years earlier.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-23 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 78 | view |
| 2020-06-02 | gagandeep@13 | 61 | view |
| 2019-12-05 | rohitbangari27@gmail.com | 68 | view |
- Large shopping malls are replacing small shops Do you think it is a positive or negative development 78
- Education for young people is important in many countries However some people think that the government should spend more money on education in adult populations who cannot read and write To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- The chart below give information about the highspeed continuous internet connection of households in five countries in 2001 and 2002 89
- Nowadays most people try to balance between work and other part of lives Unfortunately not many achieve this balance What are the problems of this Suggest some solutions to solve the problem 89
- The charts below show the performance of a bus company in terms of punctuality both actual and target what actually happened compared to what the company was trying to achieve and the number of complaints and passengers 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 97, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ised slightly to 15% in 2008. Meanwhile, other products have received a demand bo...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 6.8 162% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => 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: 907.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 184.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92934782609 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68302321012 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61791283804 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 113.0 106.607317073 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614130434783 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 264.6 283.868780488 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.2989164781 43.030603864 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.375 112.824112599 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 22.9334400587 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.875 5.23603664747 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.217943973436 0.215688989381 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.089211449538 0.103423049105 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0883343340832 0.0843802449381 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149913856148 0.15604864568 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0859847540925 0.0819641961636 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 61.2550243902 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.61 11.4140731707 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.98 8.06136585366 111% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 40.7170731707 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.