The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The charts compare the average household spending in Japan and Malaysia in terms of five important categories in 2010. Overall, it is clear that householders in both countries spent the largest proportion of their income on just three categories – housing, food and other goods and services. The percentage figures for spending on transport and healthcare in Japan were double those for Malaysia. In Malaysian households, the highest category was housing, which represented 34% of the total expenditure. Whereas this was higher than in Japan, with just 21% spent on housing, Japanese householders spent the highest proportion on a range of other goods and services, at 29%. This was slightly more than in Malaysia. In terms of food, the figures for both countries were similar, at 27% and 24% for Malaysia and Japan respectively. Expenditure on health care was the lowest category. In Japan, this accounted for 6% of the total, while 20% of household spending went on transport. These figures were exactly double(*) those shown for Malaysia.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-29 | Diksha Bharti | 61 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | dohong0812 | 56 | view |
| 2019-07-21 | vongocson | 67 | view |
| 2019-07-02 | Tee Dos | 67 | view |
| 2018-11-25 | My | 73 | view |
- Families who send their children to private schools should not be required to pay taxes that support the state education system. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? 56
- The two pie charts below show the online shopping sales for retail sectors in Canada in 2005 and 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 67
- Governments should spend more money on railways rather than roads. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 67
- The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 56
- The pie charts below show the percentage of water used for different purposes in six areas of the world Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 79
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 677, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ge of other goods and services, at 29%. This was slightly more than in Malaysia....
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 26.0 33.7804878049 77% => 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: 874.0 965.302439024 91% => OK
No of words: 168.0 196.424390244 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20238095238 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.60020574368 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7829402142 2.65546596893 105% => OK
Unique words: 93.0 106.607317073 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.553571428571 0.547539520022 101% => OK
syllable_count: 259.2 283.868780488 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.4926829268 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.8060743353 43.030603864 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.4 112.824112599 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8 22.9334400587 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.4 5.23603664747 27% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 1.0 3.83414634146 26% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => 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: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.136122434339 0.215688989381 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0636245559865 0.103423049105 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.061087913802 0.0843802449381 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136122434339 0.15604864568 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0819641961636 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.2329268293 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 61.2550243902 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 10.3012195122 82% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 11.4140731707 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.06136585366 103% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.9970731707 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum two paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.