The table describes the changes of people who went for international travel in 1990, 1995, 2000 and 2005 (million). Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The table illustrates the trends in international travelers to five distinct regions and the total number of travelers over four separate years (1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005). The unit of measurement is in millions.
What stands out from the table is that while the number of people traveling to Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East experienced an increase, the opposite trend was observed for travelers to America. Moreover, the Middle East consistently attracted the fewest visitors of all regions.
In the initial year, 680.5 million travelers, the largest figure, flocked to America, whereas the number for the Middle East was approximately one-seventh of this, at 9.8 million. There were contrasting trends in these two categories, with an upward trend observed in the number of Middle East visitors, which rose to 15.8 million, nearly doubling from the initial year. In contrast, America lost its appeal, with a reduction of over 500 million visitors to this region.
Turning to the other destinations and the total number of travelers, Europe ranked second in attracting tourists, with 280.2 million visitors in 1990. Following Europe were Asia and the Pacific, and Africa, which attracted 60.2 million and 18.2 million visitors, respectively. The total number of travelers accounted for 448.9 million. However, All these figures rose consistently over the four years mentioned.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-26 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-10-26 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-10-13 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-10-13 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-10-13 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
- The most important function of music is that it helps people reduce stress To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 67
- The given line graph illustrates clients average every year spending on mobile phone national and international land line and services 73
- The graph reveals the amount of consumption of energy in the USA since 1980 with some prediction until 2030 61
- The table below shows information about age average income per person and population below poverty line in three states in USA 78
- The table below shows information about the population of New Zealand from 2011 to 2012 by age group 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, moreover, second, whereas, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
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: 1188.0 965.302439024 123% => OK
No of words: 220.0 196.424390244 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4 4.92477711251 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72606033658 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 106.607317073 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536363636364 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 350.1 283.868780488 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.7628093819 43.030603864 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.0 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 22.9334400587 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.27272727273 5.23603664747 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 3.70975609756 216% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155346174261 0.215688989381 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0636952411358 0.103423049105 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0662309113433 0.0843802449381 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112940301888 0.15604864568 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0550657554282 0.0819641961636 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.2329268293 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 11.4140731707 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 40.7170731707 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => 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.