The table shows the amount of money given in aid of technology of developing countries by charities in the US, EU and other countries from 2006 to 2010.
The table illustrates how much money was donated for technological development in developing countries from the US, EU and other nations in 4 years from 2006 to 2010. Overall, it is clear that the donation increased significantly over the period surveyed and the US contributed the largest amount of money for charities. Units are measured in billion of US dollars.
The total aid given experienced a gradual increase through each year, from $15.7 billion in 2006 to $24.3 billion in 2009, then it reached the highest peak in 2010, at $30 billion. The America accounted for the greatest amount of money donated, from $9.7 billion, followed by $13.5 billion in 2008 before it surged to $22.7 in the final year.
However, the number of bucks given in aid of technology by the EU and other countries just saw a slight increase during 48 months. The amount of money given by EU countries experienced a small rise of $0.7 billion during the period surveyed despite a $0.1 billion decline in 2009. Lastly, other countries’ money was slightly less than the former, at $2.7 billion before reaching $3.3 billion in the end.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-18 | minhphambinh1234 | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-18 | minhphambinh1234 | 67 | view |
| 2022-01-25 | Lê Quỳnh Mai | 67 | view |
| 2021-05-28 | Chu Thị Hải | 67 | view |
| 2020-11-21 | nguyen duc | 73 | view |
- Some people believe that allowing children to make their own choices on everyday matters (such as food, clothes, and entertainment) is likely to result in a society of individuals who only think about their own wishes. other people believe that it is impo 78
- The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families living in poverty in Australia in 1999. 67
- The graph below shows different sources of air pollutants in the UK from 1990 to 2005. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The charts below show the percentage of water used by different sectors in Sydney Australia in 1997 and 2007 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 72
- The diagram shows the parts of a coffee maker 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 344, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a billion'.
Suggestion: a billion
...ey for charities. Units are measured in billion of US dollars. The total aid given e...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, lastly, then
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 : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => 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: 922.0 965.302439024 96% => OK
No of words: 190.0 196.424390244 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85263157895 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.71268753763 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71680927405 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 109.0 106.607317073 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.573684210526 0.547539520022 105% => OK
syllable_count: 261.9 283.868780488 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.4504551338 43.030603864 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.25 112.824112599 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 22.9334400587 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.75 5.23603664747 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => 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: 0.397146485161 0.215688989381 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.178520331355 0.103423049105 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.1345890585 0.0843802449381 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.276599416401 0.15604864568 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111317174846 0.0819641961636 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 61.2550243902 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.15 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => 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.