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 presented pie charts compare Japan and Malaysia in terms of the percentage occupied by 5 distinct categories in residents’ total expenses in 2010.
Overall, it is evident that citizens paid most of their incomes to equip themselves with food, housing, other goods and services in both nations. However, discernible differences were witnessed in the proportion for which each individual item accounted.
Turning into detail, Malaysian people channeled 34% of their budget into housing, ranking first among 5 groups. This figure was considerably higher than a twenty–one–per–cent proportion of Japan. By contrast, while expenditure on transport occupied 20% of domestic income in Japan, that of Malaysia was remarkably lower, which reached only 10%.
Regarding to remaining sectors, gaps of 3 per cent between money paid by citizens in two countries were witnessed in all items. Specifically, with 29% and 6%, respectively, Japanese people tended to pay more for other goods and services as well as healthcare. On the contrary, a 27-per-cent figure made Malaysian people spend a higher rate of their budget on food than Japanese residents do, whose number was 24%.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 155, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is figure was considerably higher than a twenty–one–per–cent proportion of Japan....
^^
Line 5, column 347, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...markably lower, which reached only 10%. Regarding to remaining sectors, gaps of ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 415, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ese residents do, whose number was 24%.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, regarding, well, while, as well as, on the contrary
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 : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => 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: 1007.0 965.302439024 104% => OK
No of words: 182.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.53296703297 4.92477711251 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67297393991 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25403245326 2.65546596893 123% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 106.607317073 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.681318681319 0.547539520022 124% => OK
syllable_count: 298.8 283.868780488 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 21.6076118275 43.030603864 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 111.888888889 112.824112599 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2222222222 22.9334400587 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.88888888889 5.23603664747 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
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: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0727242173537 0.215688989381 34% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0311187100745 0.103423049105 30% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0532678519987 0.0843802449381 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0566697255551 0.15604864568 36% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0655211240522 0.0819641961636 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.2329268293 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 11.4140731707 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.66 8.06136585366 120% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 40.7170731707 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.