people getting married by different age group in one particular country between 1996s and 2008s.
The given bar chart presents data about the percentage of people getting married by different age group in one particular country between 1996s and 2008s.
Overall, the percentage of female got married in age group from 16-29 higher than (the one of male) that of male, while an opposite trend was observed in age group 30-44.
Looking at the chart in more detail, the age range 16-29 in 1996 and 2008, the percentage of female getting married accounted for just less than 12% when married male accounted for 9% on the age of group 25-29. The married man rate still 1% in 1996 and gradually dropped to 0.2% in 2008 with especially non-male got married in both years.
In contrast, the percentage of getting married saw a different pattern with rates experiencing a gradual decline and female got married lower than that of a male at the age of group 30-44. In that age range, the proportion of male getting married continued its rising trend to reach a peak of over 10%.
To summarize, it can be seen that, the proportion of female got married higher than the one of male on 16-29 age group even though an opposite trend on 30-34 age group on both years 1996 and 2008 in the particular country.
- The maps below show the changes that have taken place at the waterfront area of a town called Darwin between 2009 and 2014 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The graph below compares the changes in the birth rates of China and the USA between 1920 and 2000 73
- The two graphs compares that oil was the major energy source in the USA in both 1980 and 1990 and that the number of coal natural gas and hydroelectric power remained stable in much the same proportions
- The graph below compares the changes in the birth rates of China and the USA between 1920 and 2000 67
- The two graphs compare that oil was the major energy source in the USA in both 1980 and 1990 and that the number of coal natural gas and hydroelectric power remained stable in much the same proportions
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, still, while, in contrast
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: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 989.0 965.302439024 102% => OK
No of words: 214.0 196.424390244 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.6214953271 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.34104687702 2.65546596893 88% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.467289719626 0.547539520022 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 285.3 283.868780488 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 22.4926829268 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 37.7526860782 43.030603864 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.285714286 112.824112599 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.5714285714 22.9334400587 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.23603664747 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.425686934421 0.215688989381 197% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.237217737452 0.103423049105 229% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.186869462869 0.0843802449381 221% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.295042341437 0.15604864568 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.19469108349 0.0819641961636 238% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.2329268293 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.41 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.11 11.4140731707 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.19 8.06136585366 89% => OK
difficult_words: 28.0 40.7170731707 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.9970731707 127% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.0658536585 145% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.