The graph below gives information about the percentage of the population in four Asian countries living in cities from 1970 to 2020, with predictions for 2030 and 2040.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given line graph illustrates the percentage of citizens in Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia from 1970 to 2020, with predictions for 2030 and 2040.
In general, the population living in rural areas in these four Asian countries has never decreased. Another notable point is that while Malaysians are mostly predicted to have a tendency to live in cities, the Thais are leastly plausible to live in cities.
It is obvious that the number of people living in cities gradually increased in both Malaysia and Indonesia. At the beginning, there were only 30% of Malaysian lived in cities; however, in the final year, Malaysia seems to stand at the first place, with nearly 90%. Besides, from the bottom of the list Indonesia's citizens have constantly climbed to second place (from 12% to 60%).
Furthermore, Philippines is likely to share the common trend with Thailand. At first, more than 30% of Phillippines's population lived in cities, then this number rocketed to 50% in 1999 and continued to rise. Meanwhile, Thailand started off at nearly 20% and got its peak at 30%; this number remained unchange until 2020 and is predicted to increase in 2040.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-01 | celine ayoub | 78 | view |
| 2024-03-16 | minhnhat2002 | 67 | view |
| 2024-03-06 | MinyiChu | 67 | view |
| 2024-02-02 | annaalysia007 | 84 | view |
| 2024-01-13 | phamuyen1210 | 73 | view |
- The chart below shows the amount spent on six consumer goods in four European countries 69
- Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages 56
- The most important aim of science should be to improve people s lives To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience Write at least 250 words 87
- Describe the process of fish canning 78
- The graph below shows the number of visitors to three museums between 2000 and 2005 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, furthermore, however, second, then, while, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => 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: 973.0 965.302439024 101% => OK
No of words: 193.0 196.424390244 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0414507772 4.92477711251 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.72725689877 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68557774934 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 106.607317073 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.637305699482 0.547539520022 116% => OK
syllable_count: 288.0 283.868780488 101% => 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: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.9153724761 43.030603864 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.111111111 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4444444444 22.9334400587 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 5.23603664747 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.215124102334 0.215688989381 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0897764598829 0.103423049105 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0765656812927 0.0843802449381 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146099788782 0.15604864568 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0820542609852 0.0819641961636 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.2329268293 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 61.2550243902 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 11.4140731707 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.06136585366 111% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 40.7170731707 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.