The first chart below shows the value of goods that Australia imported from China and those exported to China from Australia. The second chart shows the types of goods imported from China. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The first bar chart gives the information about the comparison between two countries about the value of goods which were imported and exported over a period of 7 years. The second chart illustrates the kinds of goods which were imported from China during 2 years from 2003.
In general, what stands out from the graph is that there was an upward trend in the amounts of value in 2 groups from 1998 to 2004. It is also clear to see that the types of goods in China in 2004 were higher than those in 2003, with the exception of clothes.
In the first chart, the value of goods which were imported and exported in China in 2004 was the highest, at $40 billion and $30 billion respectively, which was at least twice as high as those in 1998, with $20 billion and $10 billion corresponding. The figures for both in 1998 also were the lowest in the period.
In the other chart, it is obvious to see that the highest amount in this chart was in the telecommunication equipment in 2004, with $8 billion. Compared to the previous year, this was more than twice and a half, $8 billion compared with $3 billion. In the meantime, the figure for clothes in both 2003 and 2004 were the same, at $4 billion per year.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 229, Rule ID: WITH_THE_EXCEPTION_OF[1]
Message: Use simply 'except' or 'except for'
Suggestion: except; except for
...in 2004 were higher than those in 2003, with the exception of clothes. In the first chart, the value...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 132, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...elecommunication equipment in 2004, with billion. Compared to the previous year, ...
^^
Line 4, column 134, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
...ecommunication equipment in 2004, with billion. Compared to the previous year, this wa...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 210, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ar, this was more than twice and a half, billion compared with billion. In the m...
^^
Line 4, column 212, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
..., this was more than twice and a half, billion compared with billion. In the meantime...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 233, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...twice and a half, billion compared with billion. In the meantime, the figure for...
^^
Line 4, column 235, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
...ice and a half, billion compared with billion. In the meantime, the figure for clothe...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 323, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... in both 2003 and 2004 were the same, at billion per year.
^^
Line 4, column 325, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
...n both 2003 and 2004 were the same, at billion per year.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, second, so, at least, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 7.0 200% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 33.7804878049 136% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 968.0 965.302439024 100% => OK
No of words: 219.0 196.424390244 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.4200913242 4.92477711251 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.84690116678 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.3946104076 2.65546596893 90% => OK
Unique words: 102.0 106.607317073 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465753424658 0.547539520022 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 270.9 283.868780488 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.2 1.45097560976 83% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 3.36585365854 267% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.1320200908 43.030603864 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.555555556 112.824112599 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 22.9334400587 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.23603664747 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 1.69756097561 530% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => 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: 0.265786180712 0.215688989381 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122172889688 0.103423049105 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11975304784 0.0843802449381 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189574722703 0.15604864568 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.121614694242 0.0819641961636 148% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.2329268293 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 80.96 61.2550243902 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.65 11.4140731707 76% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.06 8.06136585366 88% => OK
difficult_words: 31.0 40.7170731707 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.