The pie chart compares the percentage of commuters using for different types of transport in an European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000.
The pie chart compares the percentage of commuters using for different types of transport in an European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000.
It is clear that most people drove their cars to move around the city in 2000. Overall, those of foot and bike fell sharply compared to a significant increase in the data of car and some constant oscillation in the figure for bus over the period shown.
In 1960, the percentage of people going on foot to and from work was highest, at just under 30%, followed by that of bike, with approximately 25%. In comparison about 16% was the proportion of bus users, yet the data of car was exponentially lower, merely 5%.
The year 2000 witnessed a soar in the figure for car, to just over 35%, making car the most used mean of transport while there was a dramatically drop and a plummet in those of bike and foot, to about 5% and 7% respectively. In contrast, after reaching a peak at just over 25%, the proportion of people travelling by bus decreased moderately to roughly 4%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-02-15 | promen9x1999 | 84 | view |
- The table below gives information on consumer spending on different items in five different countries in 2002.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisolls where relevant. 61
- The graph below shows the quantities of goods transported in the UK between 1974 and 2002 by four different modes of transport.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 67
- The table below gives information on consumer spending on different items in five different countries in 2002.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisolls where relevant. 56
- The pie chart compares the percentage of commuters using for different types of transport in an European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000. 84
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981, 1991 and 2001.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 94, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ing for different types of transport in an European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000. ...
^^
Line 3, column 150, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: comparison,
...hat of bike, with approximately 25%. In comparison about 16% was the proportion of bus use...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 132, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('dramatically') instead an adjective, or a noun ('drop') instead of another adjective.
... used mean of transport while there was a dramatically drop and a plummet in those of bike and foot...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 831.0 965.302439024 86% => OK
No of words: 183.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.54098360656 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67800887145 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62367931596 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579234972678 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 249.3 283.868780488 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 3.36585365854 238% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.9247086448 43.030603864 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.714285714 112.824112599 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1428571429 22.9334400587 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.71428571429 5.23603664747 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
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: 0.325148873373 0.215688989381 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.188045911389 0.103423049105 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.333571078546 0.0843802449381 395% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.305553738522 0.15604864568 196% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.401442344011 0.0819641961636 490% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.2329268293 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 61.2550243902 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.35 11.4140731707 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.