The line graph compares the percentage of four distinct materials such as paper and cardboard glass containers , aluminium cans and plastics which were reused in a peculiar country over 28 years from 1982 to 2010.
Overall, it is palpable from the graph that the higher percentage of papers was recycled in a country whereas plastics were not recycled so much as compared to the others.
Discerning the line graph, plastics and cardboards were reused through the recycling process which was approximately 60 percentage in 1982, but, it's recycling rate was gradually aggrandized and become 79 percentage during 1994.Afterwards ,slightly decremented was occurred and it's rate reached at 70 percentege. As along with, glass containers were first recycled at 50%. After 28 years , it's recycling rate was progressively elevated and become 60 percentage which was 10 minutes less than the recycling rate of papers in 2010.
Moving further, the recycling rate of aluminium canes was 5 percentile in 1982 which was sky rocketed and reached a 43 percentage in 2010. Moreover, the plastics were recycled in 1986 which was approximately 1 percentage and it's recycling rate was slowly increased and in 2010 , it's growth was reached at 9 in the form of percentage which was very diminish than that of the rest.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 111, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... as paper and cardboard glass containers , aluminium cans and plastics which were ...
^^
Line 3, column 9, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... 28 years from 1982 to 2010. Overall, it is palpable from the graph that the h...
^^
Line 3, column 120, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s recycled in a country whereas plastics were not recycled so much as compared to...
^^
Line 5, column 27, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e others. Discerning the line graph, plastics and cardboards were reused thro...
^^
Line 5, column 146, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...pproximately 60 percentage in 1982, but, its recycling rate was gradually aggrand...
^^
Line 5, column 230, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Afterwards
...ed and become 79 percentage during 1994.Afterwards ,slightly decremented was occurred and ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 240, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ome 79 percentage during 1994.Afterwards ,slightly decremented was occurred and it...
^^
Line 5, column 330, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eached at 70 percentege. As along with, glass containers were first recycled at ...
^^
Line 5, column 391, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...re first recycled at 50%. After 28 years , its recycling rate was progressively el...
^^
Line 7, column 16, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...te of papers in 2010. Moving further, the recycling rate of aluminium canes wa...
^^
Line 7, column 62, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'percentile' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'percentiles'.
Suggestion: percentiles
...recycling rate of aluminium canes was 5 percentile in 1982 which was sky rocketed and reac...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 150, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ached a 43 percentage in 2010. Moreover, the plastics were recycled in 1986 which...
^^
Line 7, column 279, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ng rate was slowly increased and in 2010 , its growth was reached at 9 in the for...
^^
Line 7, column 281, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... rate was slowly increased and in 2010 , its growth was reached at 9 in the form ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, moreover, so, whereas, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 7.0 257% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 3.15609756098 253% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 33.7804878049 80% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1101.0 965.302439024 114% => OK
No of words: 211.0 196.424390244 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21800947867 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81127787577 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91181494245 2.65546596893 110% => OK
Unique words: 105.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497630331754 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 316.8 283.868780488 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => 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: 30.0 22.4926829268 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.7785847332 43.030603864 174% => OK
Chars per sentence: 157.285714286 112.824112599 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.1428571429 22.9334400587 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.23603664747 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 14.0 1.69756097561 825% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => 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: 0.199189237345 0.215688989381 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126057272607 0.103423049105 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0520533179134 0.0843802449381 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161513152113 0.15604864568 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0476150941066 0.0819641961636 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.2 13.2329268293 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.49 61.2550243902 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.3012195122 134% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.59 11.4140731707 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.06136585366 103% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 40.7170731707 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 11.4329268293 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.9970731707 127% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.