The line graph shows the average annual expenditures on cell phone and residential phone services between 2001 and 2010.
The line chart compares the average annual expenditures on mobile phone with residential phone services in a period of 10 years from 2001.
Looking at the information in more detail, we can see that in 2001, people spent just $200 on mobile services while residential phone services have spent nearly $700 an average annual. After that, the use of cell phone increased dramatically while the spending on residential phone services was experienced a considerably drop by early of 2006. At this point, the spending of the average annual on both services was exactly the same at around $550.
However, these trends continued as people’s expending on residential phone services dropped again and hit a low at approximately $410 in 2010. By contrast, the spending decreased on residential phone services reflected on the increasing mobile phone services result in it reached its peak at close to $800 at the end of the period shown.
Overall, it is clear that although at the early of 21 centuries, residential phone services were played a dominant role in the phone services market, this circumstance has been completely changed year by year especially after 2006.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-15 | quynhhuong656 | 73 | view |
- The bar chart below shows the money spent on consumer goods in different countries. 78
- The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s. 73
- Many people do not fee safe either at home or when they out. What are the causes and what can be done to solve this. 78
- Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists not local people Why is this the case and what can be done to attract local people 74
- The pie charts below show how dangerous waste products are dealt with in three countries. 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 304, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('considerably') instead an adjective, or a noun ('drop') instead of another adjective.
...idential phone services was experienced a considerably drop by early of 2006. At this point, the sp...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 233, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ged year by year especially after 2006.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, look, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 6.8 15% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 10.0 5.60731707317 178% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => 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: 984.0 965.302439024 102% => OK
No of words: 190.0 196.424390244 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17894736842 4.92477711251 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.71268753763 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89655923497 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557894736842 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 301.5 283.868780488 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => 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: 27.0 22.4926829268 120% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 38.8392816092 43.030603864 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.571428571 112.824112599 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1428571429 22.9334400587 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.85714285714 5.23603664747 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.434369997165 0.215688989381 201% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.229568376208 0.103423049105 222% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104738794879 0.0843802449381 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.300839273282 0.15604864568 193% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104599818998 0.0819641961636 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.2329268293 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 61.2550243902 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.3012195122 134% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 11.4140731707 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.9970731707 116% => 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.