The table compares the percentages of people using different functions
of their mobile phones between 2006 and 2010
The given table compares the proportion of mobile owners with regard to additional attributes over three different years mainly 2006, 2008, and 2010.
Looking from the overall perspective, it is readily apparent that over time, the proportional rate for all but one with call facility only increased dramatically with improved functionalities.
According to the given illustration, to start with, all the mobile owners were using make call facility which remained the same over the next two years prior to declining by 1% in 2010. Moving on, the other phone features such as taking photos, exchanging text messages, playing games, and music accounted for nearly 66%, 73%, 17%, and 12% respectively at the start, while the same witnessed a significant surge in 2008 and 2010. Whereas the former two grew up substantially by 10% and 6%, the latter two climbed over double the initial rate.
Furthermore, whilst the internet surfing and video recording were not available in 2006, both made up nearly 41% and 9% in 2008 before doubling, and quadrupling the figures by the period end.
- The pie charts and table give information about the total value and sources of fish imported to the US between 1988 and 2000 92
- Some people think that governments should give financial support to creative artists such as painters and musicians Others believe that creative artists should be funded by alternative sources Discuss both views and give your own opinion 89
- The charts show the percentage of people working in different sectors in town a and b in two years 1960 and 2010 96
- The maps below show the town of Langley in 1910 and 1950 77
- people now have the freedom to live and work anywhere in the world due to the development of communication and transport what are the advantages and disadvantages of this trend 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, look, whereas, while, such as, to start with, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 33.7804878049 77% => 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: 914.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19318181818 4.92477711251 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75850956134 2.65546596893 104% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.693181818182 0.547539520022 127% => OK
syllable_count: 266.4 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.482926829268 828% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => 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: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 40.4831926716 43.030603864 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.333333333 112.824112599 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.3333333333 22.9334400587 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.6666666667 5.23603664747 261% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
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 : 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: 0.145684067806 0.215688989381 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0714395453334 0.103423049105 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0852958710617 0.0843802449381 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0912163430477 0.15604864568 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0951870146403 0.0819641961636 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.2329268293 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 61.2550243902 82% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.3012195122 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 11.4140731707 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.56 8.06136585366 119% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 40.7170731707 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => 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.