The graph below shows the annual expenditure on cell phone, national and international fixed- line and services in America between 200 and 2010.
The provided line graph demonstrates the average amount of money spent yearly on mobile phone services, national and international landline services by the American over a period of 9 years from 2001 to 2010.
Overall, it is obvious that while the annual outcome of national landline services plummeted noticeably, the opposite was true for cell phone expenditure. It is also clear that the figure for international fixed-line services hit the lowest point during most of the course under the survey.
As can be seen from the graph, in 2001, there was a record for an average of roughly $700 spent on national landline services by the U.S population, compared with only around $250 for overseas fixed-line and $200 for the remaining services. Over the next five years, the amount of money spent on national fixed-line services went down dramatically to approximately $500. On the other hand, the average annual expenditure on cell phone services witnessed a substantial growth by around $300. At the same time, the figure for overseas landline services maintained the same level at $300.
In more details, U.S residents spent the same amount of money on mobile phones and national fixed-line services in 2006, at relatively over $500 on each. However, it can be noticed that the average spending of national fixed-line services was eclipsed by the mobile phone services subsequently. Therefore, the services of mobile phones became the most well-liked means of telecommunication. Specifically, the annual expenditure on cell phone services upsurged to an approximate amount of $750 in 2010. On the contrary, the number for national landline services plunged considerably to $400. Finally, although it can be recorded a significant upward trend for cell phone services and a rapid downfall for national fixed-line services yearly expenses, the overseas landline services stayed unchanged at around $300 until the final year.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 133, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: S
... on national landline services by the U.S population, compared with only around 5...
^
Line 4, column 19, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: S
...e same level at 00. In more details, U.S residents spent the same amount of mone...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, if, so, therefore, well, while, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 1.00243902439 299% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 33.7804878049 148% => 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: 1607.0 965.302439024 166% => OK
No of words: 304.0 196.424390244 155% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28618421053 4.92477711251 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 3.73543355544 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94550097971 2.65546596893 111% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 106.607317073 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453947368421 0.547539520022 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 517.5 283.868780488 182% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.33902439024 207% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
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: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0878518147 43.030603864 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.615384615 112.824112599 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3846153846 22.9334400587 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.92307692308 5.23603664747 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => 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: 9.0 4.09268292683 220% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.347918477883 0.215688989381 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.160035819178 0.103423049105 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0645428233152 0.0843802449381 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.245109823652 0.15604864568 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0490241774375 0.0819641961636 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.2329268293 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 61.2550243902 65% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.3012195122 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 11.4140731707 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 40.7170731707 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => 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.