The table shows the number of international tourists arrivals in various countries in 2009 and 2010
The table illustrates the differences and changes in the numbers and the proportion change of international tourists travelling nine different countries in 2009 and 2010. Overall, what stands out from the graph is that there were upward trends in most researched categories, except for Hong Kong that bucked the trend. Noticeably, the most remarkable change could be found in Germany.
In particular, when it comes to France, the number levelled off at an equal number of 76,000, which constantly accounted for the highest number. Following this was the USA and Spain, with figures increasing by 1.5% and 1.8% to 67,000 and 56,000 respectively. In terms of the UK and Italy, the given graph witnessed slight growths in the numbers from 55,000 and 44,000 to 57,000 and 45,000 accordingly.
Regarding Turkey and China, significant rises of 33,000 and 55,000 from 22,000 and 10,000 to 34,000 and 24,000 correspondingly were experienced in the figure. Concerning Germany, the figure stood at 10,000 in 2009, then grew dramatically to 24,000 in 2010, which was the most considerable change. In stark contrast, in terms of Hong Kong, the year 2010 underwent a decrease of 11% from 10,000 to 9,000, which consecutively constituted the lowest score.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-12-30 | Lê Thị Thanh Tâm | 73 | view |
| 2021-12-30 | Lê Thị Thanh Tâm | 61 | view |
| 2021-12-30 | Lê Thị Thanh Tâm | 67 | view |
| 2021-11-07 | darciex_ng | 84 | view |
| 2021-10-04 | datnguyentienhnvn@gmail.com | 78 | view |
- The two plans below show the Pancha village in 2005 and 2015 78
- The table shows the number of international tourists arrivals in various countries in 2009 and 2010 89
- The graph below shows the number of tourists visiting a Caribbean island between 2010 and 2017 78
- The figures below show the changes in the number of graduates in the UK and percentages of 5 groups of graduates working in different fields from 1992 to 2002 89
- Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology is now replacing their functions To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, if, regarding, then, except for, in particular
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 6.8 191% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => 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: 1046.0 965.302439024 108% => OK
No of words: 200.0 196.424390244 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.76060309309 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86356421266 2.65546596893 108% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 106.607317073 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.64 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 272.7 283.868780488 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 3.36585365854 238% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.4157092489 43.030603864 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.222222222 112.824112599 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2222222222 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.55555555556 5.23603664747 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.124496842921 0.215688989381 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0668215594885 0.103423049105 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106959338898 0.0843802449381 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101089100359 0.15604864568 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685679596575 0.0819641961636 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.2329268293 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 11.4140731707 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.06136585366 107% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 40.7170731707 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.