The bar chart demonstrates the sum of minutes (in billions) spent on 3 types of phone calls by people in the UK over a seven-year period.
The bar chart demonstrates the sum of minutes (in billions) spent on 3 types of phone calls by people in the UK over a seven-year period.
It is clear that there was a decrease in the distances among three given call categories. While the time dedicated to local calls had always topped the list, that spent on the others experienced an upward trend after the years.
Specifically, in terms of local calls, the first four years witnessed a stable increase in the minutes on local connection, which accounted for around 90 minutes (billions) in 1999. In the last three years, although people still paid the greatest attention to this call type, the number went down slightly from 90 minutes (billions) in 1999 to 70 in 2002.
On the other hand, multinational calls were as increasingly appealing as mobile ones. For instance, from 1995 to 2002, the former always drew second biggest attention from fixed-phone users and took up nearly 60 minutes (billions) in the last year which approximately doubled the number in 1995. Likewise, although the total number of minutes of mobile calls stood at the bottom of the list over the shown period, there was a dramatic growth in the time people used this device to call, from about 5 minutes in the first year to 40 in 2002.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 154, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onnection, which accounted for around 90 minutes billions in 1999. In the last th...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, likewise, second, still, while, for instance, on the other hand
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 : 1.0 6.8 15% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 33.7804878049 130% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1043.0 965.302439024 108% => OK
No of words: 220.0 196.424390244 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74090909091 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51265803746 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 106.607317073 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581818181818 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 302.4 283.868780488 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.4926829268 120% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.873493954 43.030603864 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.375 112.824112599 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.5 22.9334400587 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.25 5.23603664747 177% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.449250486278 0.215688989381 208% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.21611249284 0.103423049105 209% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.301027646363 0.0843802449381 357% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.366630606891 0.15604864568 235% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.368936021018 0.0819641961636 450% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.2329268293 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.99 61.2550243902 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 11.4140731707 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.06136585366 97% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.9970731707 116% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.