The pie charts below show the average household expenditures on japan and Malaysia in the year 2010
The pie charts below explicate on the average house hold expenditure in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010. Overall, the pie charts comparisons the highest elaboration between Japan and Malaysia is other good and services. Beside that health care which was the lowest of that year. Ratio average house hold in Japan the other goods and services marked at 29% .at Malaysia two percent smaller difference elaboration housing have high increased previous to 34% in Malaysia of the Japan who only has 21%.
In other hand food have ratio 3% more higher than japan marked at 24% percentage the transport at japan almost percentage 20% while Malaysia marked at half smaller than is 10%. As well as development health care in Japan get 6% half higher than Malaysia 3%. The conclusion this pie chart compare mostly acquire not much different in two countries. And only has a slight difference in ratio
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-12-18 | vuongthaolinh | 85 | view |
| 2023-09-30 | huongab123 | view | |
| 2023-06-19 | mykhanh | 78 | view |
| 2023-05-07 | saminhsn | view | |
| 2023-01-14 | Kaito Mori | view |
- The line chart below show The percentage of male and female teachers in six different types of educational setting in the UK in 2010 61
- The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in country in 1959 and 2010 56
- In some countries, young people are encouraged to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university studies.Discuss the advantage and disadvantage for young people who decide to do this 61
- The chart below shoes the percentage of male and female teachers in six different types of educational setting in the UK in 2010. 61
- The pie chart compares the proportion of enrolments on six different courses at a UK collegeof education in 2010 and 2012 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 360, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...e other goods and services marked at 29% .at Malaysia two percent smaller differen...
^^
Line 2, column 34, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'higher' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: higher
...21%. In other hand food have ratio 3% more higher than japan marked at 24% percentage the...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 33.7804878049 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 745.0 965.302439024 77% => OK
No of words: 152.0 196.424390244 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90131578947 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.51124308557 3.73543355544 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44764252851 2.65546596893 92% => OK
Unique words: 88.0 106.607317073 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.578947368421 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 226.8 283.868780488 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 55.9686016888 43.030603864 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.125 112.824112599 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 22.9334400587 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.875 5.23603664747 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 3.83414634146 52% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.343686756612 0.215688989381 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.168783442775 0.103423049105 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.189882477366 0.0843802449381 225% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.27378455416 0.15604864568 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.139000514586 0.0819641961636 170% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.2329268293 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 61.2550243902 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 40.7170731707 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.