The bar graph compares the three categories of telephone calls in the UK over a period of seven years. This graph illustrates the total time spent by people using fixed line and mobile phones.
Overall, while there was an increase in the time spent on local calls using fixed line until 1999, fixed line's use for making national and international calls and mobile phone for all sorts of calls rose gradually until the end of the period. By contrast, relatively little time was spent on local calls.
In 1995, local calls came top of the list, with people spending 75 billion minutes, just ahead of national and international calls at 45 billion minutes. Mobile calls were least popular at roughly 5 billion minutes in third place. However, while national and international calls using fixed line and mobile calls reached a peak of 61 and 45 billion minutes respectively, local calls saw a gradual decline falling from a peak of 100 billion minutes in 1999 to 75 billion minutes in 2002. Its popularity had reverted to that in 1995.
In 1999, 100 billion minutes were spent on local calls using fixed line, making it almost twice as many as are spent on national and international calls. In comparison, the rise in the use of fixed line for national and international calls was minimal at 60 billion minutes, with an increase of 15 billion minutes over a 7-year span while the time spent on mobile calls witnessed a notable increase of 40 billion minutes by 2002 which is almost nine times as many as were spent back in 1995.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 115, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'illustrates'.
Suggestion: illustrates
...ver a period of seven years. This graph illustrate the total time spent by people using fi...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 339, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...billion minutes over a 7-year span while the time spent on mobile calls witnessed...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, so, third, 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 : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => 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: 1270.0 965.302439024 132% => OK
No of words: 267.0 196.424390244 136% => OK
Chars per words: 4.75655430712 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04229324003 3.73543355544 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44216009737 2.65546596893 92% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453183520599 0.547539520022 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 392.4 283.868780488 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 92.5297789903 43.030603864 215% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 127.0 112.824112599 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.7 22.9334400587 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.5 5.23603664747 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.240729858792 0.215688989381 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1115271173 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0736118937723 0.0843802449381 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155943862128 0.15604864568 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0716124095881 0.0819641961636 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.2329268293 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.3012195122 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 11.4140731707 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.29 8.06136585366 90% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.