The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in millions) of telephone calls in Finland, divided into three categories, from 1995 – 2004.
The chart shows the time spent by Finland’s residents on different types of telephone calls between 1995 and 2004.
Local landline calls were the highest throughout the period, rising from 12000 million minutes in 1995 to just under 17000 million in 2000. After peaking at 17000 million the following year, these calls had fallen back to the 1995 figure by 2004.
National and international landline calls grew steadily from 6000 million to 10500 million at the end of the period in question, though the growth slowed over the last two years.
There was a dramatic increase in mobile calls from 250 to 9800 million minutes. This rise was particularly noticeable between 2000 and 2004, during which time the use of mobile phones tripled.
To sum up, although local landline calls were still the most popular in 2004, the gap between the three categories had narrowed considerately over the second half of the period in question.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-11 | alifdores | 78 | view |
| 2018-06-11 | minhchau2205 | 61 | view |
| 2018-06-11 | minhchau2205 | 61 | view |
| 2017-02-03 | Trangnguyen95 | 73 | view |
| 2017-02-03 | Trangnguyen95 | 73 | view |
- The chart below shows the total number of minutes in millions of telephone calls in Finland divided into three categories from 1995 2004 76
- The table below shows the average band scores for students from different language groups taking the IELTS General Test in 2010 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- Some people think that governments should give financial supportto creative artists such as painters and musicians. Others believethat creative artists should be funded by alternative sources.Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 78
- The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in millions) of telephone calls in Finland, divided into three categories, from 1995 – 2004. 61
- The chart below shows the total number of minutes in millions of telephone calls in Finland divided into three categories from 1995 2004 87
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, second, still, to sum up
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 : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => 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: 790.0 965.302439024 82% => OK
No of words: 155.0 196.424390244 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09677419355 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.52844152537 3.73543355544 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45868250635 2.65546596893 93% => OK
Unique words: 95.0 106.607317073 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.612903225806 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 214.2 283.868780488 75% => 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
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => 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: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.776212365 43.030603864 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.857142857 112.824112599 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1428571429 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.23603664747 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304189743471 0.215688989381 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142882464438 0.103423049105 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0788569004767 0.0843802449381 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164040751697 0.15604864568 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0835895165825 0.0819641961636 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.2329268293 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 11.4140731707 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.06136585366 100% => OK
difficult_words: 33.0 40.7170731707 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.