The given pie charts compare the amount of money spent on buying household appliances between Japan and Malaysia in 2010.
Overall, it can be seen that while housing and food made up the two biggest portions in the budget of Japanese and Malaysian citizens, the opposite was true for investing in health care and transport. Meanwhile, people in the two examined countries also allocated the majority of their income to other goods and services.
In 2010, 34% of the total budget of inhabitants living in Malaysia was spent on housing, which was nearly 1.5 times that of Japanese citizens. Standing the second position regarding expenditure in both nations was foodstuff. These figures were 27% for the former and 24% for the latter.
By contrast, expenditure on transportation and health only accounted for small proportions in comparison with other fields. To be more specific, in Japan, the money distributed for travel and healthcare demands were 6% and 20%, respectively. These figures were twice that of Malaysian dwellers. Besides 4 main expense purposes, people in both countries also spent about one-quarter of the total wage on other goods and services.
- The maps below show a beachfront area in Australia in 1950 and today Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The graph shows the rates of participation in three activities in a UK sports club between 1983 and 2003 84
- The graph below shows the percentage of part time workers in each country of the United Kingdom in 1980 and 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Many historic buildings are being destroyed or replaced What are the reasons for this What should be done to preserve these buildings 84
- The pie charts below show the comparison of different kinds of energy production of France in two years 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, if, regarding, second, so, well, 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 : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => 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: 978.0 965.302439024 101% => OK
No of words: 188.0 196.424390244 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20212765957 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70287850203 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74496947188 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 114.0 106.607317073 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606382978723 0.547539520022 111% => OK
syllable_count: 294.3 283.868780488 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.556133938 43.030603864 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.8 112.824112599 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8 22.9334400587 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.23603664747 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.109638336538 0.215688989381 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0432905989612 0.103423049105 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0617272535617 0.0843802449381 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0832580638456 0.15604864568 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0799935618658 0.0819641961636 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 11.4140731707 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.06136585366 110% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 40.7170731707 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => 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.