The given bar graphs show the extent of cash that individuals in France, Germany and England spent on nourishment and different items in 1998 and 2008.
the bar chart illustrates the proportion of money that people in France, Germany and England spent on food and other products in 1998 and 2008.
Looking at the graph, it is immediately obvious that all three saw a significant rise in the percentage of purchases of both food and other goods over the examined period, in which France was the lead country.
In 1998, Germany was the most spent nation on 25% food and around 17% of other foods, followed by France with 15% and about 8% of the money French citizens spent was on foodstuffs and other goods, respectively. After 10 years, the figures for both categories in France climbed dramatically to 40%. Meanwhile, each person in Germany only additionally expended 5% of the money on food and over 10% for other goods in 2008.
In England, buyers paid just 10% to food in 1998 and 15% in 2008. However, the rate of money that British disbursing other goods experienced an enormous increase from 15% in 1998 to 35% in 2008.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-27 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 73 | view |
| 2019-12-27 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 73 | view |
- The percentage of female members of parliament in European countries (2000-2012) 84
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of government spending on roads and transport in 4 countries in the years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005. 73
- The maps below show the changes in a town after the construction of a hydroelectric power dam 78
- The chart below shows the percentage of the population in the UK who consumed the recommended daily amount of fruit and vegetables in 2002 2006 and 2010 73
- The charts below show the percentage of electricity consumed by di erent sectors in Eastern Australia in 2007 and 2010 72
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
the bar chart illustrates the proportion of...
^^^
Line 7, column 75, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o food in 1998 and 15% in 2008. However, the rate of money that British disbursin...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, look, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 807.0 965.302439024 84% => OK
No of words: 172.0 196.424390244 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.69186046512 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.62144681703 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52620126018 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.558139534884 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 224.1 283.868780488 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => 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: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.5743964322 43.030603864 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.285714286 112.824112599 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5714285714 22.9334400587 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.23603664747 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
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: 0.185198101951 0.215688989381 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100320163289 0.103423049105 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0904408665885 0.0843802449381 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13687849775 0.15604864568 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0982700965533 0.0819641961636 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.2329268293 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 72.5 61.2550243902 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.22 11.4140731707 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 11.4329268293 162% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => 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.