The bar graph present an overview of the income spending comparison on food and other items by three European countries namely France, Germany and England in 1998 and 2002. As an overall assessment it is clear that the French spent fourfold on other items at the end of the decade in question.
As can be seen from the graphs, the French spent 15% and 9% of their income on food and other goods respectively in 1998. Spending on the same items either quadrupled or doubled in 10 years in France. The German spent 25% and 17% on both items in 1998 which rose significantly in following decade. By contrast, the English spent 10% of the income on both the items back in 1998 and that increased massively by 50% on food and 40% on other items in 2008.
Overall it can be inferred that spending on food and other items increased in all these countries, more dramatically in France and England than in Germany.
- Many people say that cooking and eating at home is better for the individual and the family than eating out in restaurants or canteens Do you agree or disagree 84
- Nowadays many people are diagnosed with anorexia What are the causes of this What can be done to improve the situation 84
- Some people think that it is better to educate boys and girls in separate school Others however believe that girls and boys benefit more from attending mixed schools Discuss both views and give your own opinion 90
- The consumption of the world s resources oil and water etc is increasing at a dangerous rate What are causes and solutions 78
- Children who grow up in families which are short of money are better prepared with the problems of adult life than children who are brought up by wealthy parents To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 174, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
..., Germany and England in 1998 and 2002. As an overall assessment it is clear that ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 6.8 162% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => 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: 746.0 965.302439024 77% => OK
No of words: 164.0 196.424390244 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.5487804878 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.57858190836 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45070374382 2.65546596893 92% => OK
Unique words: 86.0 106.607317073 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.524390243902 0.547539520022 96% => OK
syllable_count: 214.2 283.868780488 75% => 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: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.6923991403 43.030603864 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.571428571 112.824112599 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4285714286 22.9334400587 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.857142857143 5.23603664747 16% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => 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: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.322478534387 0.215688989381 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.150348056403 0.103423049105 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111412289631 0.0843802449381 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.198546817344 0.15604864568 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0954367388626 0.0819641961636 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.2329268293 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 73.51 61.2550243902 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.41 11.4140731707 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 40.7170731707 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.