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 to developing countries by different charitable organizations from US, EU and other nations in the 2006 - 2010 period to support technical development. Units are measured in US dollars.
Overall, it is clear that total aid increased during this period. Aid money given by the US was much higher than that from other donor countries.
There was a steady rise in the total aid, from $15.7 billion in 2006 to $24.3 billion in 2009, before increasing sharply to $30 billion at the end of the period. Most of this money was from US charities, which jumped rapidly from $9,7 billion to $22.7 billion in 2006 and 2010, respectively.
Over the same period, supports from EU and other nations for less-developed countries had the same general uptrend. Began with $3.3 billion and $2.7 billion in 2006, these aids grew slowly to $3.8 billion and $3.1 billion in 2009, followed by a slight fall in the next year ( $3.7 billion and $2.6 billion), before rising again to reach $4.0 billion and $3.3 billion in 2010, for EU and other countries, respectively.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-22 | wardiati | 78 | view |
| 2019-10-15 | khoavodoj | 78 | view |
| 2019-10-08 | koinoyokan | 84 | view |
| 2019-08-28 | oxfordpro111 | 78 | view |
| 2019-08-10 | JennieD | 67 | view |
- 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. 78
- 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. 73
- Task 1: The chart below shows the annual pay (thousands of US dollars) for doctors and other workers in seven countries in 2004. 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 224, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... US charities, which jumped rapidly from ,7 billion to 2.7 billion in 2006 and 201...
^^
Line 7, column 266, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...llowed by a slight fall in the next year .7 billion and .6 billion, before rising...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 10.0 5.60731707317 178% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 884.0 965.302439024 92% => OK
No of words: 186.0 196.424390244 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.75268817204 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.69299088775 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65155454666 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 107.0 106.607317073 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575268817204 0.547539520022 105% => 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: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.3250248921 43.030603864 175% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.5 112.824112599 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.25 22.9334400587 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.25 5.23603664747 5% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
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: 0.303358675341 0.215688989381 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.157323611466 0.103423049105 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107734339908 0.0843802449381 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.218437451968 0.15604864568 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.085592957129 0.0819641961636 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.2329268293 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 73.51 61.2550243902 120% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.57 11.4140731707 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.