The chart below shows the expenditure of two countries on consumer goods in 2010.
The bar chart illustrates the amount of money spent on five different categories by the French and British in 2010. Overall, the British spent more than the French on cars, books and cameras. Both countries spent the most on cars. While the French spent the least on cameras, for the British, the least consumed of these five items was perfume. Both countries spent nearly the same amount on computers.
The British spent more on cars, books and cameras than the French. The British spent 450,000 pounds on cars, and it was 50,000 pounds more than what the French spent on cars. 400,000 pounds were spent on books by the residents of the UK, compared with the 300,000 pounds spent by the French. The most noticeable difference between British and French spending was on cameras. While the British spent 350,000 pounds on cameras, the French spent only 150,000 on this item.
By contrast, the residents of France spent / expended more money on computers and perfume than the British. As for computers, the French spent around 50,000 pounds more than the British. Likewise, the spending on perfume by the French also was more than over 50,000 pounds than the British, with 200,000 pounds and just under 150,000 pounds respectively.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-12-10 | Trần Ánh Vy | 67 | view |
| 2024-11-19 | hahoaan | 78 | view |
| 2024-11-12 | Huyenlbg87 | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-10 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-10 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
- The chart below shows the expenditure of two countries on consumer goods in 2010 11
- The chart shows the percentage of Australian men and women doing regular physical activity in 2010 78
- The bar graph shows the global sales in billions of dollars of different types of digital games between 2000 and 2006 84
- Some people believe that nowadays we have too many choices To what extent do you agree or disagree to this statement 78
- The chart shows the main methods of transportation for people traveling to a university for work or study in 2004 and 2009 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons wherever relevant
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, likewise, so, while, as for
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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => 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: 1028.0 965.302439024 106% => OK
No of words: 207.0 196.424390244 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96618357488 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79308509922 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.23829962407 2.65546596893 84% => OK
Unique words: 81.0 106.607317073 76% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.391304347826 0.547539520022 71% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 263.7 283.868780488 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.33902439024 230% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.4926829268 67% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.6218410027 43.030603864 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.0769230769 112.824112599 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.9230769231 22.9334400587 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.84615384615 5.23603664747 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.09268292683 293% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0329992225974 0.215688989381 15% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0232064262636 0.103423049105 22% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0370827131771 0.0843802449381 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0336409814444 0.15604864568 22% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0475755322102 0.0819641961636 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 13.2329268293 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 81.63 61.2550243902 133% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 5.6 10.3012195122 54% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 11.25 11.4140731707 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.36 8.06136585366 79% => OK
difficult_words: 26.0 40.7170731707 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.9970731707 73% => OK
text_standard: 6.0 11.0658536585 54% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.