The graph below shows the different modes of transport used to travel to and from work in one European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000.
The given graph compares the percentage of passengers using train, car, tube or bus to move to and from work in a European city in 1960, 1980 and 2000.
As can be observed from the graph, more people travel to work by car, however, bus users show an opposite trend.
Looking at the graph more closely, only 17% of workers use train as a mean of transport in 1960. 20 years later, the percentage peaked up at over 25%, then declining to only 22% in 2000.There was no significant changes in the proportion of subway users , whose figure in 1960 witnessed a similarity as that of train users in 1980. And in the last surveyed year, the number accounted for a quarter of the city’s citizens.
Car was least used to travel to work in 1960 ( only 6% of worker traveled by this mean), however, the percentage was nearly fourfold in 20 yeas later and peaked at over 35% in 2000. Surprisingly, a downward trend could be seen in the proportion of bus travelers: nearly 40% of city’s people used bus to go to work in1980, but the figure plunged to only 15% in the next 40 years.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 35, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...end. Looking at the graph more closely, only 17% of workers use train as a mean ...
^^
Line 3, column 187, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: There
...25%, then declining to only 22% in 2000.There was no significant changes in the propo...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 253, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...hanges in the proportion of subway users , whose figure in 1960 witnessed a simila...
^^
Line 4, column 45, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...was least used to travel to work in 1960 only 6% of worker traveled by this mean,...
^^
Line 4, column 96, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f worker traveled by this mean, however, the percentage was nearly fourfold in 20...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => 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: 881.0 965.302439024 91% => OK
No of words: 198.0 196.424390244 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.44949494949 4.92477711251 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.75116612262 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51548573703 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 113.0 106.607317073 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.570707070707 0.547539520022 104% => OK
syllable_count: 254.7 283.868780488 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 22.4926829268 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 50.332770191 43.030603864 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.857142857 112.824112599 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2857142857 22.9334400587 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.23603664747 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 1.69756097561 295% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.312643689675 0.215688989381 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151549619827 0.103423049105 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100412430265 0.0843802449381 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213885244476 0.15604864568 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0874610644858 0.0819641961636 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.2329268293 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 68.44 61.2550243902 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.3012195122 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.83 11.4140731707 77% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.74 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.9970731707 120% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => 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.