The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given graph illustrates the average household spending of two countries Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010
Overall, it is clear that Japanese and Malaysian both spend the least on Health care in 2010. Moreover the highest priority in Malaysia was Housing while the same figure in Japan was other goods and services
Regarding the Japan’s graph, it can be observed that the least purpose in Japanese’s expenditure was health care,with only 6%. Moreover, Japanese spent a quarter of their expenditure for consuming food. While, approximately one-fifth of spending made by an average Japanese were allocated to Transport and Housing. Other goods and services comprised of the largest proportion of the Japanese’s spending, reaching 29%
About the Malaysia’s illustration, the least priority of Malaysian was Health care with only 3% of the expenditure in 2010, which was similar to Japanese’s. Also, there was only 10% of Malaysian expenditure for serving the transport purpose. Nonetheless, Housing allocated the most of their spending with up to 34%. Malaysian’s citizens spend 26% to 27% of their expenditure for the purpose of Food and Other goods and services
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-05 | nhinhi999 | 78 | view |
| 2022-06-19 | Sarina2021 | 40 | view |
| 2022-06-19 | Sarina2021 | view | |
| 2022-03-27 | Ahmed Z | 81 | view |
| 2022-01-20 | Vuthungan | 78 | view |
- The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The charts show the percentage of people working in different sectors in town A and B in two years 1960 and 2010 84
- Some museums and art galleries charge admission fees while others have free entry Do you think the advantages of charging for admission outweigh the disadvantages 73
- The diagram below shows the process for recycling plastic bottles Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 80
- Some people think the increasing business and cultural contact between countries brings many positive effects Others say it causes the loss of national identities Discuss both view and give your opinion 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 95, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...spend the least on Health care in 2010. Moreover the highest priority in Malaysia was Ho...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 113, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , with
...n Japanese’s expenditure was health care,with only 6%. Moreover, Japanese spent a qua...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 128, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Two successive sentences begin with the same adverb. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...penditure was health care,with only 6%. Moreover, Japanese spent a quarter of their expe...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, moreover, nonetheless, regarding, so, 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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 33.7804878049 86% => 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: 1002.0 965.302439024 104% => OK
No of words: 185.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41621621622 4.92477711251 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68801715136 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96897027844 2.65546596893 112% => OK
Unique words: 101.0 106.607317073 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.545945945946 0.547539520022 100% => OK
syllable_count: 298.8 283.868780488 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.2361098119 43.030603864 173% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.25 112.824112599 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.125 22.9334400587 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.625 5.23603664747 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.123293098477 0.215688989381 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0574203007834 0.103423049105 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0510864930207 0.0843802449381 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108803747981 0.15604864568 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0746169831455 0.0819641961636 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.2329268293 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 61.2550243902 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.3012195122 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 11.4140731707 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.06136585366 110% => OK
difficult_words: 48.0 40.7170731707 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.