The graph shows the proportion of four different materials that were recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particular country. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, making comparisons where relevant
The line graph depicts the percentage of paper and cardboard, glass containers, aluminum cans, and plas?cs that were recycled in an unspecified country from 1982 to2010.
Overall, paper & cardboard consistently exhibited the highest recycling rate, followed by glass containers,aluminum cans and plas?cs,with varying level of fluctua?on.
Firstly, in 1982, paper and cardboard accounted for around 65%; however, this figure witnessed some fluctua?on over the 8-year period. A?er a significant propor?on of paper & cardboard has reached a peak in the reprocessing level by 1994, the data exhibited a declining trend. Moreover, glass containers recycling fell steadily from 50% in 1982 to 40% in 1990, before rever?ng to it’s previous level and began to increase gradually.
In stark contrast, at the start of the period, an insignificant amount of aluminum cans began to be reclaimed. The graph rose constantly for over a decade un?l it reached a surge totaled 45%, by the end of the ?meframe. Furthermore, reusing plas?c began a?er 8 years with the lowest percentage and experienced low-level of growth throughout the whole period.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 107, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , aluminum
...cling rate, followed by glass containers,aluminum cans and plas?cs,with varying level of...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 134, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , with
...ss containers,aluminum cans and plas?cs,with varying level of fluctua?on. Firstly,...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 381, Rule ID: ABOUT_ITS_NN[25]
Message: Did you mean 'to its previous'?
Suggestion: to its previous
...n 1982 to 40% in 1990, before rever?ng to it’s previous level and began to increase gradually. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 384, Rule ID: ITS_JJ_NNSNN[27]
Message: Did you mean 'its previous level'?
Suggestion: its previous level
...982 to 40% in 1990, before rever?ng to it’s previous level and began to increase gradually. In st...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => 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: 996.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 174.0 196.424390244 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.72413793103 4.92477711251 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.63192868298 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.32494640484 2.65546596893 125% => OK
Unique words: 113.0 106.607317073 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.649425287356 0.547539520022 119% => OK
syllable_count: 276.3 283.868780488 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 22.1810730128 43.030603864 52% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 124.5 112.824112599 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 22.9334400587 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 5.23603664747 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => 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: 0.0902396903449 0.215688989381 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.040402095411 0.103423049105 39% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0527607215216 0.0843802449381 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0658039858687 0.15604864568 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0591633244478 0.0819641961636 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 13.2329268293 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 61.2550243902 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.9 11.4140731707 139% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.06136585366 117% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 40.7170731707 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.