The diagrams below show the coastal village of seaville in 1980 and 2010.
The two diagrams provide information about the waterside village of seaville over a period of 30 years in 1980 and 2010 years respectively.
Overall, it clearly seen that, in the given map, the village underwent many restorations, resulting in several luxury infrastructure and beautification opportunities created by the end of period. However, a hotel in the bottom left corner map and a road connectivity remained unchangeable.
In the given comparison map, Woodland in the north of the village was converted to a golf course. Furthermore, in 2010 Retirement Village and Holiday Cottages were constructed. Additionally, a boat club has been set up on the middle western part of the bank of the river near the retirement village. Moreover, the removal of the Tea Room and the Sand Dunes in the south sides resulted in the establishment of a restaurant and a large hotel. On the other side of the road, holiday homes were demolished to replace the common swamp with permanent residences.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-01-22 | dinarochka | 61 | view |
- The chart shows students expenditure over a three period in the United Kingdom 1996 1999 70
- In some countries owning a home rather than renting one is very important for people Why might this be the case Do you think this is a positive or negative situation 76
- SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT RADIO HAS BECOME OUT OF DATE AND THERE IS NO NEED TO LISTEN TO THE RADIO FOR ENTERTAINMENT AND NEWS DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE 78
- The Graph below shows average carbon dioxide CO2 emissions per person in the United Kindom Sweden Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The charts below shows the value of one country s exports in various categories during 2015 and 2016 The table shows the percentage change in each category of exports in 2016 compared with 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, moreover, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 33.7804878049 83% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 835.0 965.302439024 87% => OK
No of words: 162.0 196.424390244 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15432098765 4.92477711251 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.56762134501 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17941984683 2.65546596893 120% => OK
Unique words: 103.0 106.607317073 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.635802469136 0.547539520022 116% => OK
syllable_count: 263.7 283.868780488 93% => 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: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.2634553862 43.030603864 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.375 112.824112599 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 22.9334400587 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.75 5.23603664747 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 0.168846482878 0.215688989381 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0650453654874 0.103423049105 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0915271866374 0.0843802449381 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125799396763 0.15604864568 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105267735282 0.0819641961636 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.2329268293 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 11.4140731707 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.31 8.06136585366 115% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 40.7170731707 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.