The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in billions) of telephone calls in the UK, divided into three categories, from 1995- 2002
The chart illustrates the overall minutes spent by UK residents over the period of 1995 to 2002. The calls are categorized into three types as local- fixed line, national and international - fixed line and, mobiles (all calls).
With respect to the growth of national and international call and, mobile call the local call time experienced a dip after rising to its highest point of almost 90 billions minutes in 1999. Even after declining slowly, local call held it position of highest market share till the end of 2002.
In case of national and international call, there has been a steady growth over the years starting at nearly 40 billions minutes in 1995 to almost 60 billions minutes in 2002. Furthermore, the difference between the mobile call minutes with the other two categories was very high to almost 65 billions minutes and 35 billions minutes with local calls and national and international calls respectively. Whereas, the deviations were reducing to great extent with the declining market for other two categories and rising trend of mobiles calls.
Overall, the time spent for local calls has always been the most over the course of years. On the other hand, mobile category faced significant growth from 1995 to 2002, which is almost 10 times of its initial minutes spent on mobile by the mass of UK.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 239, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'positions'?
Suggestion: positions
...er declining slowly, local call held it position of highest market share till the end of...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 248, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'of the highest'.
Suggestion: of the highest
...ing slowly, local call held it position of highest market share till the end of 2002. I...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, if, whereas, with respect to, on the other hand
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 : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => 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: 1105.0 965.302439024 114% => OK
No of words: 222.0 196.424390244 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97747747748 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.8600083453 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54767725071 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 106.607317073 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518018018018 0.547539520022 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 329.4 283.868780488 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.5787919877 43.030603864 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.777777778 112.824112599 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6666666667 22.9334400587 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 5.23603664747 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => 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: 0.292089294959 0.215688989381 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131590938781 0.103423049105 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734115367964 0.0843802449381 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185781863701 0.15604864568 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0397445327513 0.0819641961636 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.2329268293 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 61.2550243902 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 11.4140731707 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.46 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.