The line graph below shows the percentage of tourists to England who visited four different attractions in Brighton.
The line graph depicts that the proportion of visitors to four different sectors of England that was attraction by Brighton between 1980 to 2010.
Overall, it is clear that festival was the most attracted place in 1980 which replaced by pavilion in 2010. Whereas, pier had the least visitor in started year that changed to art gallery ended year.
In terms of pavilion, during the period from 1980 to 1995, there was sharp increase from 23% to 48%, before experiencing a declined by about 17% in the year 2010. Afterwards, the trend for art gallery was similar. To explain, number of visitors accounted for about 21% in 1980. After increasing from 21% to 38% visitors, the percentage of tourists fell down to under 10% that was least preferred place among people.
Regarding pier, the figure of visitors stood at 10% in 1980. But the trend for pier was increase over the period with some fluctuations and ended up with 23% in 2010. By contrast, only 30% people visited to festival in 1980, then it decreased gradually by 5% until 1995 after that it grew up slightly to 27% at the end of period.
- The two graphs show the main sources of energy in the USA in the 1980 and the 1990s. 78
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of people living alone in 5 different age groups in the USA between 1850 and 2000. 73
- The chart below shows the percentage change in the share of international students among university graduates in different Canadian provinces between 2001 and 2006. 73
- Explain some of the ways in which humans are damaging the environment. What cangovernments do to address these problems? What can individual people do? 61
- Interviews form the basic selection criteria for most Large companies However some people think that an interview is not a reliable method of choosing whom to employ and there are other better methods To what extent do you agree or disagree 77
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 109, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” 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.
...980 which replaced by pavilion in 2010. Whereas, pier had the least visitor in started ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, regarding, so, then, whereas
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 : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
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: 53.0 33.7804878049 157% => 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: 911.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 193.0 196.424390244 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.72020725389 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.72725689877 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42336430794 2.65546596893 91% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 106.607317073 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580310880829 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 246.6 283.868780488 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.0419779731 43.030603864 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.1 112.824112599 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3 22.9334400587 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.7 5.23603664747 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.115447707293 0.215688989381 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0483058259416 0.103423049105 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0992470338192 0.0843802449381 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.104740881931 0.15604864568 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.134557598486 0.0819641961636 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.2329268293 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 77.57 61.2550243902 127% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.1 11.4140731707 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.4329268293 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => 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.