The line graph below shows the percentage of tourists to England who visited four different attractions in Brighton.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The graph illustrates the proportion of visitors to England who went to four different tourist attractions in Brighton between 1980 and 2010.
Overall, it is clear that the percentage visiting the Pier and the Pavilion increased over the period, while the proportion of visitors to the other attractions fell.
In 1980, only 10% of tourists to England went to Brighton Pier. Despite some minor fluctuations, this figure rose from about 12% in 2000 to 22% in 2010. The percentage visiting the Pavilion also increased, from 23% in 1980 to almost 50% in 1995. However, this figure then declined, to 35% in 2000 and then about 30% in 2010, slightly higher than the Festival.
The most popular Brighton attraction in 1980 for visitors to England was the Festival. Although 30% of these attended the Festival in 1980, by 2010 this percentage had fallen slightly to 28%. In 1980, the figure for visitors to the Art Gallery was 21%. It rose to a peak of 38%, but then decreased dramatically to less than 10% in 2010. It was, therefore, the least popular of attractions at the end of the period.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-20 | canconmuoi | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-20 | canconmuoi | 61 | view |
- The graph shows the number of visitors for three different areas in the European country between 1987 to 2007. 73
- The line graph below shows the percentage of tourists to the England who visited four different attractions in Brighton.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 61
- The line graph below shows the percentage of tourists to England who visited four different attractions in Brighton.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, then, therefore, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 917.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 188.0 196.424390244 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87765957447 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.70287850203 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6454518655 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 98.0 106.607317073 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.521276595745 0.547539520022 95% => OK
syllable_count: 248.4 283.868780488 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 1.53170731707 326% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => 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: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.6693914228 43.030603864 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.3636363636 112.824112599 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0909090909 22.9334400587 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.54545454545 5.23603664747 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => 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: 0.15793907774 0.215688989381 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0678100919753 0.103423049105 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0805505843123 0.0843802449381 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126788735632 0.15604864568 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.08833714522 0.0819641961636 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 13.2329268293 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 79.6 61.2550243902 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 10.3012195122 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.73 11.4140731707 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.34 8.06136585366 91% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.4329268293 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.