The chart below shows global sales of the top five mobile phone brands between 2009 and 2013.
The given bar chart provides a comparison of the sales among five mobile phone brands from 2009 to 2013.
From an overall perspective, most of mobile phone company witnessed an upward trend whereas the reverse pattern occured in LG and Nokia company. Although Nokia hosted the most highest rank at the beginning, this rank was altered by Samsung at the end.
According to the data recorded in the chart, it is evident that Nokia was the most preferred mobile phone brand, with nearly 450 mobile phones sales per year and more than 2 to 3 times when compared with the others. Following that, in 2011 Samsung and Nokia continued to came as the first and the second top rank in 2011, which were 320 and 420 phone sales per year. However, the sales in three others company was under 100. Subsequently, Samsung accounted for the highest number of sales in 2013 while the second rank was Nokia.
It is obvious that Samsung had experienced a dramatic upward trend from 2009 to 2010, which the amount of sales at the end was increase by double. Followed that, Apple made a threefold jump in sale betwwen 2009 and 2013. Despite a slight increase in revenue, ZTE still came as the least preferred company at the end. Finally, Nokia and LG witnessed a downward trend, which decrease by nearly 200 sales in Nokia and 50 sales in LG.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 172, Rule ID: MOST_SUPERLATIVE[1]
Message: Use only 'highest' (without 'most') when you use the superlative.
Suggestion: highest
...okia company. Although Nokia hosted the most highest rank at the beginning, this rank was al...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 172, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'most the highest'.
Suggestion: most the highest
...okia company. Although Nokia hosted the most highest rank at the beginning, this rank was al...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, second, so, still, whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 3.15609756098 253% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1095.0 965.302439024 113% => OK
No of words: 235.0 196.424390244 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.65957446809 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.25783079735 2.65546596893 85% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 106.607317073 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540425531915 0.547539520022 99% => OK
syllable_count: 318.6 283.868780488 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.2549020378 43.030603864 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.5454545455 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3636363636 22.9334400587 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.27272727273 5.23603664747 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26394950964 0.215688989381 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111185966977 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.114532812412 0.0843802449381 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.20181013159 0.15604864568 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.14219001554 0.0819641961636 173% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.75 11.4140731707 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 40.7170731707 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => 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.